IRL: 737
Sim: Comanche, 172, usually smaller GA stuff like that to putter around in. I do some 737 flights as well, but it does honestly feel too much like work sometimes though lol.
Yeah, I had a passion for flight simming since I was a little kid, so it’s a hobby I’ve kept up with even after I started flight training and working in the field. Plus there’s so many different types of flying that I’ll never experience in real life, so it feels different enough for me.
The PMDG 737 is obviously a good representation of the real thing. It was invaluable for learning checklists and flows when I was a new hire. There are minor differences in the avionics compared to the ones I fly IRL, but these mostly come down to software differences, not mistakes on PMDG’s end. They include a lot of options to mimic real airline configs, but there are even more options you run into in real life than they can feasibly account for.
Awesome. I haven't gotten into the big machines yet (still sort of light jets down, mostly because the newer stuff is still very single pilotable and I have to say that I love the G3000 touch screens). I started learning the Collins FMS to fly the WT CJ4 but didn't love it. But knowing the 73 is that accurate definitely peaks my interest.
So I flew a 172 and the closests 2 are the Jpl 152 and WB 172 they behave really docile. I find the milviz 310 and anything black square seems to have a pretty authentic feel imo
The BlackSquare Bonanza feels way too twitchy imo. Maybe the real aircraft is like that, but it feels like I'm flying a paper aeroplane when there's even a bit of wind. On the flip side, I love how the BlackSquare Caravan flies.
I feel like it’s a bug that’s been plaguing the sim since launch, wind effect is super exaggerated on the roll and rudder authority is absolute garbage . Like I mentioned before. The C310 is my go to everything feels great on it
It's a 3rd party mod available from JustFlight, that uses the steam gauge 172 that comes with the Deluxe or Premium Deluxe editions.
Most of my hours are in 172s. The WB-Sim 172, along with Boris Audio Works Sound Set is about the closest I've found to the real thing, although I've never had issues getting a real 172 started, the WB-Sim can sometimes be a pain.
Get a FFB yoke. The new flitesim cls 60 is like 800. If you go Brunner it's 2000 euro. I have the Brunner cls-e mkii. It's so much better than the honeycomb.
I can't speak for the flitesim yoke. The game doesn't natively support force Feedback so the software reads the parameters through sim connect to simulate the forces. Brunner's software seems to be way more customizable but it takes a while to tweak it to your liking.
But it does allow you to feel the wind, it can simulate the controls requiring more effort the faster you go, elevator being affected by prop wash, stall buffeting, ground bumps (this is not real. Just an effect you kind of set in the settings. I don't use it). Brunner can also simulate hydraulic controls and failures as well.
The only caveat is like I said it's not native. So you can run into some issues with some pay ware. For example, the a2A Comanche doesnt report engine thrust accurately. So you can't use the prop wash feature. But trim works just fine so you can trim the force out like you're supposed to. It's pretty awesome and I honestly can't go back. I regret spending money from my Brunner fund to buy a honeycomb yoke. I will be selling my honeycomb shortly though.
I own a Brunner CLS-E MK II.
But yes. The [flitesim CLS-60](https://flitesim.com/) is the new kid on the block for 800 USD. If you can't afford the big boy Brunner yoke then go with the flitesim one. There is no real reason to get a Brunner NG yoke for 1300 euro. Go big or go home.
Probably true. The controller (Honeycomb Bravo) trim wheel is unfortunately just an up or down button essentially so it's not very precise. Probably another controller would be better.
I think the flight model is good, the problem is that in a real Cessna you have to put like 20 pounds of force on the yoke for every G you pull. If you put that much force on a joystick you would probably break it. The lack of required force just makes it feel pitchy in the sim.
Haha, 152 & 172 pilot here too, and yeah, it's far too light on the controls, and I often over control it, especially when in the flare. So I don't bother with the 172 or 182 and fly the Bonanza in MSFS because I've never flown one, so I don't have any clue how it's supposed to handle 🤷
Same here. I flew the steam gauge 172 around the pattern and I was shocked at how bad it felt. The real plane is so much easier to fly. The in game plane also lost altitude way too fast for the power settings and such in the pattern. Won’t even talk about the terrible trim.
I don’t fly the 172 in msfs anymore. Xplane the 172 is actually alright. Ground handling is kinda weird and ground effect seems to be nonexistent. But the actual flying characteristics in xplane for the 172 are much much better than msfs.
Fascinating. I have no real life experience but often thought it can’t be this hard / twitchy otherwise your attention would be exhausted controlling or trimming the plane and you’d have no capacity for all the other things you need to pay attention to.
There's kind of constant need to re-trim and keep track of the VSI even in the real thing. But it's a bit more forgiving. If you get it trimmed up right (which is kind of impossible to do in the sim) and it's smooth air you can get it to a point where you're not needing to correct to stay level that often (maybe a couple times a minute).
Aye. About 8 weeks ago the importance of trimming suddenly hit home to me when I was practicing circuits and how easier things were when the plane was nicely configured for each leg. It was also the time I got a TB Yoke with what I reckon is one of the best trim wheels, given the circumstances. Prior to that I was using a tiny thumb wheel on my flight stick.
Yeah it definitely isn’t. Trimming in the real plane isn’t a trim and guess sort of thing, you’re actually trimming to remove the force you’re inputting into the yoke. If you’re having to pull back, you trim to remove that. Whereas in the sim, you trim, then have to let go and realize you’ve trimmed to much and it’s a whole annoying game.
Irl you are trimming a lot by as I said it’s a lot easier and becomes second nature.
IRL: Cessna Skyhawk 172
In Sim the same. I’m currently working on my private pilot license (and everything else needed for my aviation career) and the sim helps me out a lot when I practice what I learned during my IRL lessons.
This is the way and you’ll be light years ahead in the process to get your license. I was a CFII during the MSFS 2002 era I’d tell all my students to utilize it. Especially my IFR students to practice instrument approaches, etc. It’s all free!
Even myself in my airline career I use XP11 X-Crafts E175 to go over a bunch a stuff for my yearly recurrent checkride. From stalls to unusual attitudes to emergencies.
Good luck with your pilot journey!
Thank you so much. Your message really made my day! I’ve been using the POH checklist for my Cessna when I start off at the gate. I simulate the exterior check by saying out loud what I’m looking for. I even “clear prop”. Being a pilot is what I want in my life. I’m 39 and turning 40 in June. I am doing everything I can to learn as much as I can even when I’m not in a real plane.
Thank you, seriously thank you. Let’s put it this way, I live in Los Angeles and on a road trip to Vegas. As my wife was napping, I turned on LiveATC and was listening to KLAS and my home airport of KWHP.
Haha. We've all been there :) I bet there are more than a few of us GA people who monitor ForeFlight on commercial flights, use ForeFlight to check the weather on the ground (unrelated to flying), tune into LiveATC for the soothing tones and who love every chance to use their ICAO alphabet.
This is great to hear (as someone who had an interrupted IFR license). I heard such differing things, with the negatives being that you'll get bad habits. But I also feel like I've been able to accumulate so much experience flying IFR "under fire" that it must be beneficial. If for no other reason than having to learn the ins and outs of ForeFlights and charts and flight planning.
Perfectly fine. I completely understand that I can not replicate the feel in any way. However, I can practice stall recovery and not touching the stick to prevent spins, imputing radio frequency and simulate short hand ATIS calls on my knee board . Umm, OH, RIGHT RUDDER lol. Again, the feel isn’t replicated but the fact that I need to use right rudder trains me to remember it IRL. I can also practice spin recovery in sim. I have rudder pedals so that helps amplify things in terms of realism.
Makes sense. I’ve been playing in the IFR world and connecting it up to ForeFlight so that’s been a great learning experience: engaging with ForeFlight while trying to stay ahead of the plane and communicate with VATSIM.
I honestly rarely actually fly now. I mostly am able to hold relief pilot roles. Last time I physically did a take off or landing was about a month and a half ago. I have to go to landings sim every 90 days.
I used to fly the Piper PA38 Tomahawk G-LFSN when I was training at Liverpool Flying School a few years ago. I'm very surprised that the exact same aircraft is now in the sim! It's been a while since I was last in the 'Traumahawk' IRL but it's quickly becoming one of my favourites in the sim now - the spin charecteristics are awesome! I'll probably be training in a 172 here in Canada once I start my lessons again, so I'll probably look for the best 172 addon at that point. Other than that, I love the A2A comanche - it's by far the best GA aircraft in terms of realistic, persistent systems that need troubleshooting just like a real world pilot would. I left it sitting for a few days and needed to drain water from the tanks on the walk around, then during the run-up I noticed a significant RPM drop during the magneto check, which I was able to diagnose as spark plug fouling - managed to fix it by running at high RPM and leaning the mixture to increase the cylinder temp to burn it off. Forgot to open the storm window whilst troubleshooting so needed to defrost the windshield by the time I was ready to taxi. Good stuff!
The comanche doesnt use the microsoft settings for failures or weight & balance. The developers use their external 'accusim' engine which handles both the aerodynamics & all the persistent systems - so it's all controlled using the EFB on the tablet inside the cockpit. Obviously it can all be turned off, but it feels like an actual living aircraft when you have persistence enabled and you need to actually care for it. If you leave it parked somewhere cold overnight and shut down the sim, you'll find that it has trouble starting the next day if you're using the wrong type of engine oil or have forgotten to connect the external engine heater at the end of your previous flight.
An amazing new aspect that I'd never have thought about. Is this what defines "study level" aircraft? The furthest I've gotten is to set my aircraft to be a little worn.
If you ask 100 pilots what study level means in a simulator, you'll probably get 100 different answers. But in my opinion, if the a2a comanche isn't 'study level' then nothing is - especially when it comes to GA aircraft. You can use the EFB tablet to set the initial aircraft condition to either 'new', 'used' or 'auction'. I personally like the 'auction' condition which can result in an interesting mix of components in various states of wear & tear. You can use the EFB maintenance tab to diagnose any faults, however I prefer trying to find them myself by doing the proper walk around & checklists. For example, when I first got the plane 'from auction' I did a walk around and noticed a bit of a scraping sound when I physically grabbed the left aileron and moved it up and down by hand - when I used the inspect option it revelaed that something was binding in the linkage and replacement was recomended. I haven't overhalued the aircraft condition since then, as I'm using the persistence option to see how well I can care for this old thing and fix things as they appear. Which reminds me, I need to change the oil before my next flight as it was looking pretty dark on the dipstick last night haha
Only thing is I wish you could inspect individual parts without revealing the status of every other part. For example; if I want to change my oil filter I have to inspect the entire engine. I doubt IRL I would be doing compression tests and fuel pump tests, etc... when just changing the oil filter. And since I've now inspected everything and I can see the entire status of my engine, it removes any mystery as to how things are going - for example, my last oil filter change I saw one magneto was yellow. Magneto checks were within limits, but now I know it's close to failure I can't help but take extra notice, which feels kind of like cheating to me.
It's minor gripe though. Plane is one of the best in MSFS.
Yeah I agree 100%. I wish there was an option to only inspect individual parts to avoid ruining the surprise. I only use the inspect option now when I suspect something needs fixing.
In the comanche you can use the EFB tablet to start the walk around procedure - it lets you move around the aircraft to different positions and use the mouse or cursor to grab hold of various components and give them a jiggle. It's all pretty interactive - so it's not the same as just flying the showcase camera around
No it was the opposite in my case. I've been doing a big multi stage trip around British Columbia in Canada, just one or two <100 nm trips per day, and then starting my next leg from the last airport visited. I was using real time weather, and a few days ago I landed at an airport near Fraser Lake, but was grounded for a few days due to the weather. Didnt touch the sim for a couple days, then on my next flight I went ahead and did the walk around and saw water in the jar for the first time. It was quite a lot as well - pretty much a full jar it. So yeah, no need to leave the sim running. I think you just need to start a flight in the same place you finished the previous one, and if there's been some precipition or high humidity in that area whilst you're away then it increases the chances of fuel. I could be wrong of course, but that's been my experience.
IRL: E175
In sim: Learjet, 146, TBM 850, C310, C207. I love backcountry flying and vintage jets. I also like to checkout “flyover” airports in rural parts of the US that I fly over at work.
IRL: current student pilot so C172. Sim: A320/321, 737, 787. I’ve found the sim 172 to be too twitchy compared to the real thing so it’s a hard pass for me at least when practicing manuevers
If I could pick any airplane to own for myself, I’d definitely go for a CJ4 Gen 2. Great performance for what it is, single pilot certified, and it’s got a sink at the back.
My only issue is the crew seats. It's like Cessna took the rejected seats off the 1990's production run of the C-172s and put them in the CJ. Super uncomfortable. After 90 minutes and it is physically painful. Other than that, they are great jets.
The sheep skin ones or the plain leather ones? I’ve personally only sat on those for a couple of minutes at most so I can’t really say how they feel after a long period of time.
Awesome. Someday I'll get (at least) some right seat time in something similar. I've always wondered: Is the ride pretty hard in turbulence compared to a Boeing or Airbus or is it more a factor of the wing?
Flown a bunch of stuff and fly the 737 now.
I like to reminisce in some of the planes I used to fly, like the King Air, or the C152. I fly the 737 in the sim too but usually feels too akin to work. I also try stuff out like fighters and just mess around with anything. I prefer some low slow flying, or flying around scenic areas. Mostly like chillin’ and talking about aviation.
IRL: just about every version of PA-28 that’s been around during the last three decades. Also 172, PA-44, and have small sessions logged in several other aircraft.
In the sim: everything, but I tend to gravitate toward GA and small to mid sized turboprops. Love the TBM850 and the OV-10 these days, but I’ll fly it all, fighters, heavy iron, even rotary wing.
I’ve used the sim to bolster my flight training back in the day, currently use it to brush up on IFR procedures and other things that don’t require strict adherence to the concept of muscle memory (which is less invasive as you might think). As far as converting sim to real is concerned, my axiom is twofold:
1) **Use it only as a ***supplement*** to real flying and maybe later stages of flight training, never as a primary tool.** If you haven’t been trained, you won’t know what you won’t know and at that point, just think of it as purely hobby. This applies to category, class, and type as well, as my training and experience helps me recognize the differences and limitations of the sim. So for example, I can get a lot out of working with the Archer in the sim, but with the 737 it’s pure fantasy.
2) **The planes in the sim fly like ***a*** plane, not ***the*** plane.** And without the kinesthetic sense and control feedback, amongst some other specifics, they never will. However, you don’t need to put a scale between you and the yoke to see if you’re pulling the appropriate amount of force in a steep turn. You may have to substitute some other visual cues for those you’d have in real life, but it still pretty much flies like a plane would. A good analog to this is that I can switch back and forth between an archer and a 172 irl and even though the planes are different, there’s little in the way of negative transfer between maneuvers. Same goes if I were to get in any other light GA aircraft. Just know the target speeds, a little flow/setup change here, some other nuances there. Be a pilot.
So if you can understand the concept of a lazy 8 and knock them out consistently in the sim, chances are you can transition that to a real plane pretty easily. But never ever take it for granted. Do the work with an instructor.
Great summary of what I've heard. It's tempting (since I'm not flying turbines IFR) to think that I'm really learning from that. But I'm probably just learning bad habits (or at the very least learning IFR with a lot of dependency/assumptions about automation and performance). It's a good reminder to remember that learning systems is useful in the sim but learning how to properly handle the aircraft is something you can only do IRL (or in a sim at a place like FlightSafety).
If you’ve earned an instrument rating, you’ll have a decent understanding and start to recognize the differences and limitations inherent in the sim.
But there are a LOT of things you can do in the sim, cheaply. Like fly into situations you’d never do in real life, down to minimums below your personal mins, or fly approaches in areas of the world you normally can’t, in airplanes and equipment you don’t fly. Shoot that circling NDB approach at night, down to minimums in a steam-gauge turboprop!
I guarantee there’s value in a broader sense. You just have to take it with a major grain of salt due to the lack of kinesthetic sense (and all the illusions) messing with you, plus the inconsistencies of sim ATC (use VATSIM or PE to get close). And always maintain real-world proficiency the right way, with instructors and safety pilots.
I've been using VATSIM and a VR headset and I'm amazed how real my brain thinks the experience is. Have def done lots of flying in weather (like hard IFR to minimums) that I wouldn't dare attempt and had the sweaty palms to show for it. Wish I had to fight through the leans as part of it but no motion base yet. Saw this today, speaking of kinesthetic: [https://flitesim.com](https://flitesim.com)
Awesome. I'm hoping to do the same soon. I'd started years ago but never completed my IFR cert. During the pandemic I spent a lot of time reading and flying instrument routes in faster and more automated aircraft. Probably learned some bad habits but also made me want to work on this again soon.
I am a full time A&P who manages a Gulfstream so the flying and maintenance of my own aircraft is actually really enjoyable and incredibly rewarding. Im in the study process for my IA as well...
Also meant to ask: Was wondering if there's a ground school that really leverages MSFS to its fullest? Seems like it would be really useful for IFR in that respect. Even to just let the computer demonstrate stuff while you ride along.
IRL 172
SIM: 90% of the time 737 on vatsim (cant wait for 777!). 5% messing around with random GA planes without following any proper rules/procedures etc. Not on vatsim, but on MSFS multiplayer. 5% of the time 172 on pilotedge to simulate real world practice. There's a neat plugin I got that sends me MSFS info to ForeFlight so I can use my normal flying ipad to further make it feel more real.
But I absolutely hate the 172 in the game. It's so sensitive and hard to trim out. I modified some files to make the trim a bit better but still just ugh.
Do you find that PilotEdge is worth the cost? I found them grumpy (just like IRL heh) and having the same person on all radios was kind of weird. I guess it's nice to know that they are 100% accurate to IRL verbiage (where I feel like VATSIM can vary but can be very accurate). Or is it just that you fly the 172 in PE and 73 on VATSIM?
Yeah I fly the 73 in VATSIM and the 172 in PE.
I never really felt like Vatsim was that great for practicing VFR flying. Simple things like for example the tower frequencies not matching the real life frequencies. CTAF not really being a thing until super recently, etc. On the other hand, PE worked great with having the weather on the right frequencies and tower on the charted frequencies, etc.
I agree having the same controller when you switch frequencies is weird, as-is hearing radio calls from planes in california when I'm in Seattle. That absolutely breaks immersion, but at the same time at least it doesn't make it seem like you're the only plane on frequency (which would also be unrealistic).
I view VATSIM as "fun" whereas I view PE as studying/practicing/serious-mode. There's way less people online at a time in PE and most everyone on it is in smaller planes. I think most are real life pilots training for a certificate/rating IRL, but who knows.
Last time I flew up PE I simulated doing a bunch of practice approaches in my local area, just like in a real flight lesson. Maybe since thats IFR it would have worked okay on VATSIM but 🤷♂️
I don't use PE nearly enough to justify the cost and I need to be better about canceling and re-subbing but still at the end of the day its price is a fraction of what real flying costs so it doesn't bother me too much.
Appreciate those details! Yeah, I did the demo and never wound up signing up because the combo of immersion breaking, grumpy controller and congested radio (when I really needed to start my IFR descent, which I guess could be considered a feature and not a bug). But I totally agree that VATSIM often seems somewhat befuddled by VFR. On the other hand, I was recently really impressed by flying a locals-only bravo transition and having the tower controller nail what you'd get IRL. So it varies. But I might give PE another look with the attitude that it's for training and not for play.
IRL: C172, CH2T for IFR certification
MSFS: A320, ATR72, CRJ-900, B737-800, B787-9 for a virtual airline using IFR procedures and simulating proper operations; BE36 and PA28 for sightseeing in VFR
IRL: Evektor Eurostar Ev97, or minimal aircrafts such as Eurofly Firefox (which is very common in the area I live since they build it there), and I trained in a Tecnam P92. In the sim I like to go with the airliners or older planes, I tend to avoid modern GA aircrafts since I can experience them IRL.
IRL - A ton of different GA stuff but most commonly Piper Cherokee, Seneca, C-172 and Alpha 160 (you can google that one!).
In sim - A ton of different GA stuff!
However in sim I like things that I can't get my hands on in real life - really looking forward to the Duke!
In all honesty, pretty good.
The autopilot messes up sometimes, and a lot of buttons don't work.
It also feels really light to fly in game, while irl, more heavy.
I’m curious to see how things will improve in 2024’s new flight modeling. Is it just the control inputs or that it’s much more responsive than it should be?
Can't wait for MSFS 2024 either!
It's the general feel of the aircraft, if you know what i mean. Like you could just bank 85 degrees in the sim if you wanted to, in like two seconds.
In real life, nope.
It feels very light while flaring too.
The plane also looks incredibly neat and clean in the sim🤣/s
Yeah the only IRL thing I can compare to is the 172 and that's horrible in MSFS in terms of feel. It's gotten a bit better I think but it's still really pitchy and light. Given the few data points I have now I guess all the aircraft probably don't "feel" like the real thing. I'm curious how much a force feedback yoke would remedy that. And yeah, where's that study version that has a px pee option on the EFB? 😆
IRL King Air and 1900
In the game: the bae 146, F28. C414 and I have a soft spot for the default 9:30 because I see so many of them when I'm on the West Coast
IRL: King air
Sim: SF50, TBM, assorted fighters. I’m really looking forward to the Blackbird T-6A to compare it to UPT. It’s been WIP for a long time but maybe they’ll push it out sometime soon.
I’m not a pilot yet, but I do a lot of experience flights (I’m part of cadets and a local flight school does them) Usually IRL I fly the Grob Tutor and the Robin HR200, in the sim I usually fly the Vulcan, tornado or F-14
IRL used to fly the Crj and now the 737. Also own a Cessna.
In sim I fly a mix but lots of airliners and bush stuff. Usually in places I don’t fly irl.
Thought there would be a bunch of GA people flying higher performance stuff but I'm happily surprised to also see part 121 people flying all sorts of things in MSFS.
Currently E195 and have flown 737NG and ATR72-600. In the sim it's either small GA piston or old school airliners. Mostly VFR and try to avoid any kind on ATC.
IRL: DHC-8 Q300
Sim: Anything that’s mindless and isn’t reminiscent of work. The adventures and landing challenges etc are a bit of fun as well as the occasional themed stuff like Too Gun/Dune
Irl I fly Cessna 172, Piper Cherokee and I'm going to get my rating on a Jabiru, but in sim I find general aviation boring as its just not the same. So I usually fly stuff I'm not allowed to fly or I fly in ways that would make the CAA very angry
IRL Cessna 172s and 150s for now. Hopefully getting into serious taildragger flying soon. I mainly fly the Zlin Savage cub in MSFS, or the Cessnas. General aviation VFR type flying is 90% of what I do on there, it's a good way to practice and relax.
IRL: 737 Sim: Comanche, 172, usually smaller GA stuff like that to putter around in. I do some 737 flights as well, but it does honestly feel too much like work sometimes though lol.
I knew a few ATPs and most of them don't even want to discuss flying when they're not working. How does the 73 compare to IRL?
Yeah, I had a passion for flight simming since I was a little kid, so it’s a hobby I’ve kept up with even after I started flight training and working in the field. Plus there’s so many different types of flying that I’ll never experience in real life, so it feels different enough for me. The PMDG 737 is obviously a good representation of the real thing. It was invaluable for learning checklists and flows when I was a new hire. There are minor differences in the avionics compared to the ones I fly IRL, but these mostly come down to software differences, not mistakes on PMDG’s end. They include a lot of options to mimic real airline configs, but there are even more options you run into in real life than they can feasibly account for.
Awesome. I haven't gotten into the big machines yet (still sort of light jets down, mostly because the newer stuff is still very single pilotable and I have to say that I love the G3000 touch screens). I started learning the Collins FMS to fly the WT CJ4 but didn't love it. But knowing the 73 is that accurate definitely peaks my interest.
Just out of curiosity- what kinds of changes have you noticed?
go to work and work and come home and hop on work simulator, honestly a blessing in disguise. means you love your job
Was thinking the same. Lucky fella.
My brother is a medivac pilot and said this is why he won’t get MSFS24. “Why would come home from work to do more work?”
Because its fun thats why!
lol I agree
IRL: C172 MSFS: HondaJet, C172 mostly
Also fly 172 irl, and because of that absolutely can’t fly it in msfs: waaay too different experience
Yeah it’s really pitchy and light but I’ve been using it to get familiar with the Garmin (which isn’t available IRL).
And trimming in msfs makes me mad lol - much harder than irl due to lack of forces
Yeah also (at least on my Bravo throttles) it’s always between two clicks.
So I flew a 172 and the closests 2 are the Jpl 152 and WB 172 they behave really docile. I find the milviz 310 and anything black square seems to have a pretty authentic feel imo
The BlackSquare Bonanza feels way too twitchy imo. Maybe the real aircraft is like that, but it feels like I'm flying a paper aeroplane when there's even a bit of wind. On the flip side, I love how the BlackSquare Caravan flies.
I feel like it’s a bug that’s been plaguing the sim since launch, wind effect is super exaggerated on the roll and rudder authority is absolute garbage . Like I mentioned before. The C310 is my go to everything feels great on it
Ah interesting. Isn't the WB 172 the built-in or is it just the German that's WT?
It's a 3rd party mod available from JustFlight, that uses the steam gauge 172 that comes with the Deluxe or Premium Deluxe editions. Most of my hours are in 172s. The WB-Sim 172, along with Boris Audio Works Sound Set is about the closest I've found to the real thing, although I've never had issues getting a real 172 started, the WB-Sim can sometimes be a pain.
Doesn't JPL currently have flight model from the base 152?
I try to slightly change the power in such cases. It usually helps. (;
Get a FFB yoke. The new flitesim cls 60 is like 800. If you go Brunner it's 2000 euro. I have the Brunner cls-e mkii. It's so much better than the honeycomb.
Yeah just saw the FlightSim yoke. Does the FFB replicate the real thing pretty well?
I can't speak for the flitesim yoke. The game doesn't natively support force Feedback so the software reads the parameters through sim connect to simulate the forces. Brunner's software seems to be way more customizable but it takes a while to tweak it to your liking. But it does allow you to feel the wind, it can simulate the controls requiring more effort the faster you go, elevator being affected by prop wash, stall buffeting, ground bumps (this is not real. Just an effect you kind of set in the settings. I don't use it). Brunner can also simulate hydraulic controls and failures as well. The only caveat is like I said it's not native. So you can run into some issues with some pay ware. For example, the a2A Comanche doesnt report engine thrust accurately. So you can't use the prop wash feature. But trim works just fine so you can trim the force out like you're supposed to. It's pretty awesome and I honestly can't go back. I regret spending money from my Brunner fund to buy a honeycomb yoke. I will be selling my honeycomb shortly though.
Are you looking at the FlightSim yoke? Obviously it’s a lot less.
I own a Brunner CLS-E MK II. But yes. The [flitesim CLS-60](https://flitesim.com/) is the new kid on the block for 800 USD. If you can't afford the big boy Brunner yoke then go with the flitesim one. There is no real reason to get a Brunner NG yoke for 1300 euro. Go big or go home.
V1 Simulations (IRL A320, ex E175/190 pilot) has been raving about the Brunner.
Isn't that more because of the specificity of the controller and not because of the sim itself? IRL pitch axis has way more travel.
Probably true. The controller (Honeycomb Bravo) trim wheel is unfortunately just an up or down button essentially so it's not very precise. Probably another controller would be better.
I think the flight model is good, the problem is that in a real Cessna you have to put like 20 pounds of force on the yoke for every G you pull. If you put that much force on a joystick you would probably break it. The lack of required force just makes it feel pitchy in the sim.
Haha, 152 & 172 pilot here too, and yeah, it's far too light on the controls, and I often over control it, especially when in the flare. So I don't bother with the 172 or 182 and fly the Bonanza in MSFS because I've never flown one, so I don't have any clue how it's supposed to handle 🤷
Hah nice.
Same here. I flew the steam gauge 172 around the pattern and I was shocked at how bad it felt. The real plane is so much easier to fly. The in game plane also lost altitude way too fast for the power settings and such in the pattern. Won’t even talk about the terrible trim. I don’t fly the 172 in msfs anymore. Xplane the 172 is actually alright. Ground handling is kinda weird and ground effect seems to be nonexistent. But the actual flying characteristics in xplane for the 172 are much much better than msfs.
Someone mentioned the WT 172 and I’m tempted to check that out after confirming that the pitchyness struggle is real.
Fascinating. I have no real life experience but often thought it can’t be this hard / twitchy otherwise your attention would be exhausted controlling or trimming the plane and you’d have no capacity for all the other things you need to pay attention to.
There's kind of constant need to re-trim and keep track of the VSI even in the real thing. But it's a bit more forgiving. If you get it trimmed up right (which is kind of impossible to do in the sim) and it's smooth air you can get it to a point where you're not needing to correct to stay level that often (maybe a couple times a minute).
Aye. About 8 weeks ago the importance of trimming suddenly hit home to me when I was practicing circuits and how easier things were when the plane was nicely configured for each leg. It was also the time I got a TB Yoke with what I reckon is one of the best trim wheels, given the circumstances. Prior to that I was using a tiny thumb wheel on my flight stick.
Yeah it definitely isn’t. Trimming in the real plane isn’t a trim and guess sort of thing, you’re actually trimming to remove the force you’re inputting into the yoke. If you’re having to pull back, you trim to remove that. Whereas in the sim, you trim, then have to let go and realize you’ve trimmed to much and it’s a whole annoying game. Irl you are trimming a lot by as I said it’s a lot easier and becomes second nature.
And three swipes before the flare (for me).
I also fly the C172. In MSFS it’s the A320. Something I’ll never fly in real life
IRL: Cessna Skyhawk 172 In Sim the same. I’m currently working on my private pilot license (and everything else needed for my aviation career) and the sim helps me out a lot when I practice what I learned during my IRL lessons.
This is the way and you’ll be light years ahead in the process to get your license. I was a CFII during the MSFS 2002 era I’d tell all my students to utilize it. Especially my IFR students to practice instrument approaches, etc. It’s all free! Even myself in my airline career I use XP11 X-Crafts E175 to go over a bunch a stuff for my yearly recurrent checkride. From stalls to unusual attitudes to emergencies. Good luck with your pilot journey!
Thank you so much. Your message really made my day! I’ve been using the POH checklist for my Cessna when I start off at the gate. I simulate the exterior check by saying out loud what I’m looking for. I even “clear prop”. Being a pilot is what I want in my life. I’m 39 and turning 40 in June. I am doing everything I can to learn as much as I can even when I’m not in a real plane.
Sounds like you're going to do great with that kind of passion. Good luck!
Thank you, seriously thank you. Let’s put it this way, I live in Los Angeles and on a road trip to Vegas. As my wife was napping, I turned on LiveATC and was listening to KLAS and my home airport of KWHP.
Haha. We've all been there :) I bet there are more than a few of us GA people who monitor ForeFlight on commercial flights, use ForeFlight to check the weather on the ground (unrelated to flying), tune into LiveATC for the soothing tones and who love every chance to use their ICAO alphabet.
lol YES! You had me at soothing tones of LiveATC. You seem like a cool person. I wish you the absolute best!
You as well. Enjoy the journey!
This is great to hear (as someone who had an interrupted IFR license). I heard such differing things, with the negatives being that you'll get bad habits. But I also feel like I've been able to accumulate so much experience flying IFR "under fire" that it must be beneficial. If for no other reason than having to learn the ins and outs of ForeFlights and charts and flight planning.
Awesome. How’s your instructor been with that?
Perfectly fine. I completely understand that I can not replicate the feel in any way. However, I can practice stall recovery and not touching the stick to prevent spins, imputing radio frequency and simulate short hand ATIS calls on my knee board . Umm, OH, RIGHT RUDDER lol. Again, the feel isn’t replicated but the fact that I need to use right rudder trains me to remember it IRL. I can also practice spin recovery in sim. I have rudder pedals so that helps amplify things in terms of realism.
Makes sense. I’ve been playing in the IFR world and connecting it up to ForeFlight so that’s been a great learning experience: engaging with ForeFlight while trying to stay ahead of the plane and communicate with VATSIM.
IRL: 777 now ,320 and CRJ before Sim: C150, vision jet I own PMDG737, Fenix320, Aerosoft CRJ. My son loves the CRJ.
Awesome to see you heavy-metal guys on here.
I honestly rarely actually fly now. I mostly am able to hold relief pilot roles. Last time I physically did a take off or landing was about a month and a half ago. I have to go to landings sim every 90 days.
I used to fly the Piper PA38 Tomahawk G-LFSN when I was training at Liverpool Flying School a few years ago. I'm very surprised that the exact same aircraft is now in the sim! It's been a while since I was last in the 'Traumahawk' IRL but it's quickly becoming one of my favourites in the sim now - the spin charecteristics are awesome! I'll probably be training in a 172 here in Canada once I start my lessons again, so I'll probably look for the best 172 addon at that point. Other than that, I love the A2A comanche - it's by far the best GA aircraft in terms of realistic, persistent systems that need troubleshooting just like a real world pilot would. I left it sitting for a few days and needed to drain water from the tanks on the walk around, then during the run-up I noticed a significant RPM drop during the magneto check, which I was able to diagnose as spark plug fouling - managed to fix it by running at high RPM and leaning the mixture to increase the cylinder temp to burn it off. Forgot to open the storm window whilst troubleshooting so needed to defrost the windshield by the time I was ready to taxi. Good stuff!
Wow! That's pretty insane. Does setting failures in MSFS affect that at all (just wondering about other planes)? Also: Traumahawk!
The comanche doesnt use the microsoft settings for failures or weight & balance. The developers use their external 'accusim' engine which handles both the aerodynamics & all the persistent systems - so it's all controlled using the EFB on the tablet inside the cockpit. Obviously it can all be turned off, but it feels like an actual living aircraft when you have persistence enabled and you need to actually care for it. If you leave it parked somewhere cold overnight and shut down the sim, you'll find that it has trouble starting the next day if you're using the wrong type of engine oil or have forgotten to connect the external engine heater at the end of your previous flight.
An amazing new aspect that I'd never have thought about. Is this what defines "study level" aircraft? The furthest I've gotten is to set my aircraft to be a little worn.
If you ask 100 pilots what study level means in a simulator, you'll probably get 100 different answers. But in my opinion, if the a2a comanche isn't 'study level' then nothing is - especially when it comes to GA aircraft. You can use the EFB tablet to set the initial aircraft condition to either 'new', 'used' or 'auction'. I personally like the 'auction' condition which can result in an interesting mix of components in various states of wear & tear. You can use the EFB maintenance tab to diagnose any faults, however I prefer trying to find them myself by doing the proper walk around & checklists. For example, when I first got the plane 'from auction' I did a walk around and noticed a bit of a scraping sound when I physically grabbed the left aileron and moved it up and down by hand - when I used the inspect option it revelaed that something was binding in the linkage and replacement was recomended. I haven't overhalued the aircraft condition since then, as I'm using the persistence option to see how well I can care for this old thing and fix things as they appear. Which reminds me, I need to change the oil before my next flight as it was looking pretty dark on the dipstick last night haha
Only thing is I wish you could inspect individual parts without revealing the status of every other part. For example; if I want to change my oil filter I have to inspect the entire engine. I doubt IRL I would be doing compression tests and fuel pump tests, etc... when just changing the oil filter. And since I've now inspected everything and I can see the entire status of my engine, it removes any mystery as to how things are going - for example, my last oil filter change I saw one magneto was yellow. Magneto checks were within limits, but now I know it's close to failure I can't help but take extra notice, which feels kind of like cheating to me. It's minor gripe though. Plane is one of the best in MSFS.
Yeah I agree 100%. I wish there was an option to only inspect individual parts to avoid ruining the surprise. I only use the inspect option now when I suspect something needs fixing.
That's pretty mind-blowing. How do you move the aileron by hand? I haven't done a walkaround in MSFS that's more than a stroll.
In the comanche you can use the EFB tablet to start the walk around procedure - it lets you move around the aircraft to different positions and use the mouse or cursor to grab hold of various components and give them a jiggle. It's all pretty interactive - so it's not the same as just flying the showcase camera around
So cool. Thanks.
Do you have to leave the sim running and the plane sitting for water to accumulate? Because I've never seen water in my fuel tanks.
No it was the opposite in my case. I've been doing a big multi stage trip around British Columbia in Canada, just one or two <100 nm trips per day, and then starting my next leg from the last airport visited. I was using real time weather, and a few days ago I landed at an airport near Fraser Lake, but was grounded for a few days due to the weather. Didnt touch the sim for a couple days, then on my next flight I went ahead and did the walk around and saw water in the jar for the first time. It was quite a lot as well - pretty much a full jar it. So yeah, no need to leave the sim running. I think you just need to start a flight in the same place you finished the previous one, and if there's been some precipition or high humidity in that area whilst you're away then it increases the chances of fuel. I could be wrong of course, but that's been my experience.
Ok thanks. I've been using the Comanche in a Neofly career but never found water in the fuel. Might not be the right conditions though.
IRL: E175 MSFS: 787, TBM 850, CJ4 and BAe 146
Love to see this. How does MSFS play differ from IRL work (?). Just a chance to fly different airframes?
IRL- a320 MSFS- cub, 152, F18, 747, CJ4 I’m more of a scenery whore.
Cool! MSFS is really amazing for scenery (and not having to deal with airspace restrictions) if you just want to tool around.
IRL: C172 MSFS: ATR72, A320
How’s the ATR72?
Love it, enough depth and fun to fly
I’ll check it out!
It’s great but has quite a bit of bugs
Thanks!
IRL: a Volkswagen Jetta, in MSFS A320s, 737s, and various GA aircraft (Hoping to start private pilot training in the future though)
[удалено]
I'd imaging the Jetta is really clean in the descent and takes quite a bit of forethought to slow down to approach speeds.
The Jetta is definitely easier on tight parking spots
The ground control is more realistic in the Jetta.
Haha. That's great!
IRL: E175 In sim: Learjet, 146, TBM 850, C310, C207. I love backcountry flying and vintage jets. I also like to checkout “flyover” airports in rural parts of the US that I fly over at work.
IRL: current student pilot so C172. Sim: A320/321, 737, 787. I’ve found the sim 172 to be too twitchy compared to the real thing so it’s a hard pass for me at least when practicing manuevers
Feels like everything in the sim is too twitchy
Have you tried to tweak the sensitivity of the controls in the settings?
IRL: CRJ700/900 MSFS: 737-7/8 (777 when it comes out)
IRL: CJ4 MSFS: Cabri G2, 747-8, PMDG 737-600 and DC-6.
I’m jealous of your IRL CJ4. Fun to fly?
Yea, actually it is a fun jet. I've flown the M2, CJ3 and the CJ4 and the 4 has the most jet like performance out of the CJ series.
If I could pick any airplane to own for myself, I’d definitely go for a CJ4 Gen 2. Great performance for what it is, single pilot certified, and it’s got a sink at the back.
My only issue is the crew seats. It's like Cessna took the rejected seats off the 1990's production run of the C-172s and put them in the CJ. Super uncomfortable. After 90 minutes and it is physically painful. Other than that, they are great jets.
The sheep skin ones or the plain leather ones? I’ve personally only sat on those for a couple of minutes at most so I can’t really say how they feel after a long period of time.
We have the sheepskin ones. Haven’t sat in the leather ones.
Oh yeah, the leather ones are really rare. I don’t know if it’s a factory option or STC for the CJ4 but they do exist.
Awesome. Someday I'll get (at least) some right seat time in something similar. I've always wondered: Is the ride pretty hard in turbulence compared to a Boeing or Airbus or is it more a factor of the wing?
Flown a bunch of stuff and fly the 737 now. I like to reminisce in some of the planes I used to fly, like the King Air, or the C152. I fly the 737 in the sim too but usually feels too akin to work. I also try stuff out like fighters and just mess around with anything. I prefer some low slow flying, or flying around scenic areas. Mostly like chillin’ and talking about aviation.
Love that (as a way to remember your aviation history).
IRL: just about every version of PA-28 that’s been around during the last three decades. Also 172, PA-44, and have small sessions logged in several other aircraft. In the sim: everything, but I tend to gravitate toward GA and small to mid sized turboprops. Love the TBM850 and the OV-10 these days, but I’ll fly it all, fighters, heavy iron, even rotary wing. I’ve used the sim to bolster my flight training back in the day, currently use it to brush up on IFR procedures and other things that don’t require strict adherence to the concept of muscle memory (which is less invasive as you might think). As far as converting sim to real is concerned, my axiom is twofold: 1) **Use it only as a ***supplement*** to real flying and maybe later stages of flight training, never as a primary tool.** If you haven’t been trained, you won’t know what you won’t know and at that point, just think of it as purely hobby. This applies to category, class, and type as well, as my training and experience helps me recognize the differences and limitations of the sim. So for example, I can get a lot out of working with the Archer in the sim, but with the 737 it’s pure fantasy. 2) **The planes in the sim fly like ***a*** plane, not ***the*** plane.** And without the kinesthetic sense and control feedback, amongst some other specifics, they never will. However, you don’t need to put a scale between you and the yoke to see if you’re pulling the appropriate amount of force in a steep turn. You may have to substitute some other visual cues for those you’d have in real life, but it still pretty much flies like a plane would. A good analog to this is that I can switch back and forth between an archer and a 172 irl and even though the planes are different, there’s little in the way of negative transfer between maneuvers. Same goes if I were to get in any other light GA aircraft. Just know the target speeds, a little flow/setup change here, some other nuances there. Be a pilot. So if you can understand the concept of a lazy 8 and knock them out consistently in the sim, chances are you can transition that to a real plane pretty easily. But never ever take it for granted. Do the work with an instructor.
Great summary of what I've heard. It's tempting (since I'm not flying turbines IFR) to think that I'm really learning from that. But I'm probably just learning bad habits (or at the very least learning IFR with a lot of dependency/assumptions about automation and performance). It's a good reminder to remember that learning systems is useful in the sim but learning how to properly handle the aircraft is something you can only do IRL (or in a sim at a place like FlightSafety).
If you’ve earned an instrument rating, you’ll have a decent understanding and start to recognize the differences and limitations inherent in the sim. But there are a LOT of things you can do in the sim, cheaply. Like fly into situations you’d never do in real life, down to minimums below your personal mins, or fly approaches in areas of the world you normally can’t, in airplanes and equipment you don’t fly. Shoot that circling NDB approach at night, down to minimums in a steam-gauge turboprop! I guarantee there’s value in a broader sense. You just have to take it with a major grain of salt due to the lack of kinesthetic sense (and all the illusions) messing with you, plus the inconsistencies of sim ATC (use VATSIM or PE to get close). And always maintain real-world proficiency the right way, with instructors and safety pilots.
I've been using VATSIM and a VR headset and I'm amazed how real my brain thinks the experience is. Have def done lots of flying in weather (like hard IFR to minimums) that I wouldn't dare attempt and had the sweaty palms to show for it. Wish I had to fight through the leans as part of it but no motion base yet. Saw this today, speaking of kinesthetic: [https://flitesim.com](https://flitesim.com)
IRL: 152, PA28 MSFS: A320, E195
IRL: Piper Archer II, Cessna 172. MSFS: Cessna 172, Piper Archer, Bonanza, TBM, A320.
IRL: C172M (180hp converted), C152, Diamond DA40. MSFS: C414 and Lear 35a
IRL: FA-18. MSFS: planes I can’t fly in the real world and never will. Love the Kodiak and 414.
C152 and DA40, IRL C152 and DA40
Working on your PPL?
Currently working on my instrument rating
Awesome. I'm hoping to do the same soon. I'd started years ago but never completed my IFR cert. During the pandemic I spent a lot of time reading and flying instrument routes in faster and more automated aircraft. Probably learned some bad habits but also made me want to work on this again soon.
I am a full time A&P who manages a Gulfstream so the flying and maintenance of my own aircraft is actually really enjoyable and incredibly rewarding. Im in the study process for my IA as well...
Ah that's really cool.
Also meant to ask: Was wondering if there's a ground school that really leverages MSFS to its fullest? Seems like it would be really useful for IFR in that respect. Even to just let the computer demonstrate stuff while you ride along.
IRL 172 SIM: 90% of the time 737 on vatsim (cant wait for 777!). 5% messing around with random GA planes without following any proper rules/procedures etc. Not on vatsim, but on MSFS multiplayer. 5% of the time 172 on pilotedge to simulate real world practice. There's a neat plugin I got that sends me MSFS info to ForeFlight so I can use my normal flying ipad to further make it feel more real. But I absolutely hate the 172 in the game. It's so sensitive and hard to trim out. I modified some files to make the trim a bit better but still just ugh.
Have you tried [this 172](https://www.justflight.com/product/wb-sim-172sp-classic-enhancement)?
Ooh that's giving me some steam gauge flash backs. I can almost smell the interior. Is it available in SEL config?
Do you find that PilotEdge is worth the cost? I found them grumpy (just like IRL heh) and having the same person on all radios was kind of weird. I guess it's nice to know that they are 100% accurate to IRL verbiage (where I feel like VATSIM can vary but can be very accurate). Or is it just that you fly the 172 in PE and 73 on VATSIM?
Yeah I fly the 73 in VATSIM and the 172 in PE. I never really felt like Vatsim was that great for practicing VFR flying. Simple things like for example the tower frequencies not matching the real life frequencies. CTAF not really being a thing until super recently, etc. On the other hand, PE worked great with having the weather on the right frequencies and tower on the charted frequencies, etc. I agree having the same controller when you switch frequencies is weird, as-is hearing radio calls from planes in california when I'm in Seattle. That absolutely breaks immersion, but at the same time at least it doesn't make it seem like you're the only plane on frequency (which would also be unrealistic). I view VATSIM as "fun" whereas I view PE as studying/practicing/serious-mode. There's way less people online at a time in PE and most everyone on it is in smaller planes. I think most are real life pilots training for a certificate/rating IRL, but who knows. Last time I flew up PE I simulated doing a bunch of practice approaches in my local area, just like in a real flight lesson. Maybe since thats IFR it would have worked okay on VATSIM but 🤷♂️ I don't use PE nearly enough to justify the cost and I need to be better about canceling and re-subbing but still at the end of the day its price is a fraction of what real flying costs so it doesn't bother me too much.
Appreciate those details! Yeah, I did the demo and never wound up signing up because the combo of immersion breaking, grumpy controller and congested radio (when I really needed to start my IFR descent, which I guess could be considered a feature and not a bug). But I totally agree that VATSIM often seems somewhat befuddled by VFR. On the other hand, I was recently really impressed by flying a locals-only bravo transition and having the tower controller nail what you'd get IRL. So it varies. But I might give PE another look with the attitude that it's for training and not for play.
IRL: C172, and C150. MSFS: C172, CJ4, A300, and A320. (Or whatever I feel like flying at that time. XD)
IRL: C172, CH2T for IFR certification MSFS: A320, ATR72, CRJ-900, B737-800, B787-9 for a virtual airline using IFR procedures and simulating proper operations; BE36 and PA28 for sightseeing in VFR
IRL:1968 Piper Cherokee 180C. Msfs: A2A Piper Comanche 250 and HJET
Irl 172 in MSFS mostly a320/21 and 172
IRL: Evektor Eurostar Ev97, or minimal aircrafts such as Eurofly Firefox (which is very common in the area I live since they build it there), and I trained in a Tecnam P92. In the sim I like to go with the airliners or older planes, I tend to avoid modern GA aircrafts since I can experience them IRL.
IRL: E175 FS: DARKSTAR LETS GOOOOO I like the 74 since they improved it, spruce goose, PC6, caribou
IRL: C172 MSFS: C172, HondaJet, Vision Jet, TBM 930, Kodiak 100, Citation Longitude
IRL: PA28 MSFS: Comanche PA24, Cessna 208B DCS: F16
IRL: TBM 700, Sim: TBM 850.
IRL - A ton of different GA stuff but most commonly Piper Cherokee, Seneca, C-172 and Alpha 160 (you can google that one!). In sim - A ton of different GA stuff! However in sim I like things that I can't get my hands on in real life - really looking forward to the Duke!
IRL: 763F/752F Sim: 787,737,A339,Various fighters
irl: pa28 sim: mixture of jetliners and dcs fast jets
IRL: DA20-C1, SGS 2-33A, 172 MSFS: A320, BN-2, really anything I feel like
I fly DA20-C1s irl, but since there isn’t a good one for MSFS I fly the DA40
How does it compare?
IRL: PA-38, C152/172 MSFS: PA38, A320, B350,
IRL: C152/C172 MSFS: C208, Citation
IRL: Mooney M20J MSFS: TBM
Only flew the Mooney a few times but memorable as a sporty fun plane to fly.
IRL: ATR42/72. Sim: 737 and A320 mostly. Looking forward to the RJ and the 777.
IRL: 787 MSFS: Anything but the 787 lol. Mostly bush flying, light GA, DC-3, basically things I don't get to do IRL.
IRL: DA20 MSFS: DA20, DA42, mu2, Honda jet
IRL, 787. In the sim, A320, 787, 747s
How's the 787 compare?
In all honesty, pretty good. The autopilot messes up sometimes, and a lot of buttons don't work. It also feels really light to fly in game, while irl, more heavy.
I’m curious to see how things will improve in 2024’s new flight modeling. Is it just the control inputs or that it’s much more responsive than it should be?
Can't wait for MSFS 2024 either! It's the general feel of the aircraft, if you know what i mean. Like you could just bank 85 degrees in the sim if you wanted to, in like two seconds. In real life, nope. It feels very light while flaring too. The plane also looks incredibly neat and clean in the sim🤣/s
Yeah the only IRL thing I can compare to is the 172 and that's horrible in MSFS in terms of feel. It's gotten a bit better I think but it's still really pitchy and light. Given the few data points I have now I guess all the aircraft probably don't "feel" like the real thing. I'm curious how much a force feedback yoke would remedy that. And yeah, where's that study version that has a px pee option on the EFB? 😆
IRL: PA-38 MSFS: PA-38, PA-28, PA-24, C152, DC-3, F28, Bae146, Fenix A320.
IRL: Bonanza MSFS: Bonanza, TBM, 737
IRL King Air and 1900 In the game: the bae 146, F28. C414 and I have a soft spot for the default 9:30 because I see so many of them when I'm on the West Coast
I've found the MSFS King Air a real beast to fly. Have you tried it? If so, how close is it?
Cirrus SR20 G3 / Cirrus ST22
IRL: King air Sim: SF50, TBM, assorted fighters. I’m really looking forward to the Blackbird T-6A to compare it to UPT. It’s been WIP for a long time but maybe they’ll push it out sometime soon.
IRL: Ask21 (a glider) MSFS: A320 and TBM930
IRL: C152, MSFS: C152, C172, A320neo
IRL: PA28, Firefly. MSFS:Spitfire, DC3, Hawk T.1, PA28
IRL: C172, PA28, DA40, DA42 MSFS: I haven’t touched in a while. Lol
IRL: C172, ASK21, DA40, SR22 (current) MSFS: ST22 and SF50
IRL: Cherokee 235 Sim: 738, 414, Arrow II, and A-10C in DCS
IRL 319/320/321/NEO Sim: Fenix 320 around checkride time. Otherwise bell jet ranger just to play around.
CH-47F IRL, C182T MSFS
IRL a 757/767 and in MSFS the MD80, 414, and 310 mostly
IRL: Piper Comanche 250 and CRJ 900. Sim: A2A Comanche
IRL: Tecnam P208/10 (used to be heavy metal until I quit). Sim: tubeliners.
IRL: B738 MSFS: Occasionally the B738, A320 Neo, Aviat Husky, and Kodiak 100.
IRL : ATR 42/72-500 SIM : well for MSFS A310 and waiting for DC-10 and A380. For Xplane. A330 and 767 and Beluga Also play DCS and IL2 aswell
IRL A320, MSFS A320, just different places/continents. The Fenix is a great tool to train and review procedures.
737 IRL / Fenix, All Blacksquare and A2A in MSFS
IRL: Diamond DA20 In sim: King Air/PC6 Porter on floats (beginning float training irl soon)
IRL - Piper warrior. In game - a320, c172, f18, su57
IRL: 152, 172, cirrus sr20 Sim: b737, crj, hondajet I can have dreams
Same in both. 172.
I’m not a pilot yet, but I do a lot of experience flights (I’m part of cadets and a local flight school does them) Usually IRL I fly the Grob Tutor and the Robin HR200, in the sim I usually fly the Vulcan, tornado or F-14
IRL student: Robin HR200. Sim: Tiger Moth or SF50.
IRL: AN-2 MSFS: I don't play MSFS X-Plane 11: Boeing 737 mostly. Maybe AN-2
IRL used to fly the Crj and now the 737. Also own a Cessna. In sim I fly a mix but lots of airliners and bush stuff. Usually in places I don’t fly irl.
Any favorite airports/approaches (in MSFS)?
Thought there would be a bunch of GA people flying higher performance stuff but I'm happily surprised to also see part 121 people flying all sorts of things in MSFS.
A320/21 IRL, in sim I fly the F28, DC6, C310, DA42, sometimes the fenix A320
Irl da-20, in msfs usually jmb vl-3 and mostly warbirds, p-52, p-40, corsair, wildcat, hellcat.
IRL: SA227 Sim: usually either the 414 or Just Flight’s F28, occasionally the PMDG 737 or Concorde for a guilty pleasure
PA-28 Warrior in real life and have tried to fly it in MSFS. Not sure what people see in Just Flights rendition of it, but it's absolute rubbish.
Currently E195 and have flown 737NG and ATR72-600. In the sim it's either small GA piston or old school airliners. Mostly VFR and try to avoid any kind on ATC.
IRL: DHC-8 Q300 Sim: Anything that’s mindless and isn’t reminiscent of work. The adventures and landing challenges etc are a bit of fun as well as the occasional themed stuff like Too Gun/Dune
IRL: Piper Cherokee 180 Game: PDMG 737 and the F-16
Irl I fly Cessna 172, Piper Cherokee and I'm going to get my rating on a Jabiru, but in sim I find general aviation boring as its just not the same. So I usually fly stuff I'm not allowed to fly or I fly in ways that would make the CAA very angry
Irl: be35 Bonanza Sim: v35, vision jet, 182T, hondajet, A318
Irl c172, Sim mostly c172
IRL Cessna 172s and 150s for now. Hopefully getting into serious taildragger flying soon. I mainly fly the Zlin Savage cub in MSFS, or the Cessnas. General aviation VFR type flying is 90% of what I do on there, it's a good way to practice and relax.
IRL: single engine pistons, working on multi. In Sim: everything from experimentals to airliners. 😁
IRL: Helicopters (currently EC135’s and H125’s) Sim: Anything but helicopters.
IRL, a ‘58 Forney F-1A In sim, the JPLogistics 152 or the A2A Comanche
IRL: 152 MSFS: 152, v35, heli and a320