|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Developer
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Saturday, September 28, 2024 9:27:47 AM
Posts: 5,065,
Visits: 9,199
|
|
Hi Steve:
Yes - we'd like to be able to support the Carenado c172 in the lessons for sure. They make excellent planes and have been most helpful to us over the years.
I agree that the lessons by Rod are very good- I think a lot of folks don't realize the challenge of making lessons that are useful, tough AND not completely frustrating for the novice. 
If they are too easy - what is the point of doing them? If they are too hard - some folks will no longer be pleased. 
That brings up a point which I will throw open to the floor (all members)...
What is your opinion of the Circuit Mode already in FSFS for FSX/FS2004 and P3D?
Any lessons would be based on the same sort of experience as Circuit Mode - but with more explanation of what the instructor was trying to teach and to test. 
As I mentioned before, the present Circuit Mode is an excellent way to test your control of the airplane within pretty demanding, but achievable tolerances, but... not everyone likes it. 
Your thoughts...?
Jeff Preston ('Squadron Leader') - FSFlyingSchool Publisher & Lead Developer
FSFlyingSchool 2023 for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FSFlyingSchool 2023 for X-Plane 12 & 11
FS Instant Approach 2023 for X-Plane 12 & 11 (Windows)
FSFlyingSchool PRO 2020 Prepar3D v 5
FSFlyingSchool PRO 2019 FSX, FSX-SE, FS2004
FSFlyingSchool USA for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FS Instant Approach 2019 for X-Plane 11 (Mac)
FS Instant Approach for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FS Instant Help for FSX, FS2004
Winner of 5 consecutive PC Pilot Magazine 'Classic Product' Awards
Fly like the Pros with X-Plane, Flight Simulator and Prepar3D!
If you wish to unsubscribe simply reply to email with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the SUBJECT line.
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Captain
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, October 03, 2021 2:48:46 AM
Posts: 60,
Visits: 145
|
|
SquadronLeader (10/17/2014)
Yes - we'd like to be able to support the Carenado c172 in the lessons for sure. They make excellent planes and have been most helpful to us over the years.
I was thinking more along the lines of the 182, 185 or the CT206H in HD...j/k...
SquadronLeader (10/17/2014)
That brings up a point which I will throw open to the floor (all members)...
What is your opinion of the Circuit Mode already in FSFS for FSX/FS2004 and P3D?
Any lessons would be based on the same sort of experience as Circuit Mode - but with more explanation of what the instructor was trying to teach and to test.
As I mentioned before, the present Circuit Mode is an excellent way to test your control of the airplane within pretty demanding, but achievable tolerances, but... not everyone likes it.
Your thoughts...?
A good question you posed -with an obvious, easy answer from me: I like it  .
I've sent you a rather lengthy pm with more thoughts about circuit training and such. If you feel it is worthy to share with all the other members here, please feel free to do so with my blessings.
Thanks SL.
[At this point SquadronLeader has included Steve's private message which Steve offered for inclusion in the discussion...]
I myself like the circuit training, although I must admit, I haven't been doing those as much as regular flights with FSFS.
(If you go and check the scoring tables, or my flight maps, you will I am a regular and active FSFS user.)
Reason being is that when I installed P3D v2, I left the instructor active along with giving advice, whereas in FSX/FS9 versions, I have him muted w/no advice given.
That said, in the past few months I have been practicing ILS approaches and things like DME's in heavies, so I have found that having the advice on in P3D v2 has been a major help (it would be nice to have the 757 -or AIRBUS 320-321's: HINT HINT!!!- detail pack in P3D for that purpose, but that's another topic altogether...lol).
Now a question for you: are you thinking of scrapping the circuit training overall, and replacing it with whatever you come up with here as something new?
I'd be totally against that "scrapping" move, btw. Circuit training is essential for those learning to turn onto different up/down/left/right wind/base or final legs. It certainly has helped me.
FSFS probably has the best form of training in that aspect out here on the flight sim web imo.
The only thing missing from the circuit training is military approaches (Yes, you need 'military planes before you can do military approaches -I get it, I'm 'reaching' here...)
Since you have brought up the missions thing earlier, why not consider creating a mission pack (or, as found in flights/scenario packs for FS9 and P3D, respectively) that would start you off in a smaller class of plane like the 172, and gradually move the missions up some kind of progression scale, making them more challenging as you move along successfully -and it would be a good way to keep circuit training involved for those who do like it.
And not just for the 172 alone -create different "packs" for various planes- but obviously you would have a long list of planes to choose from there, let alone payware models.
On the other hand, that could get very complicated -and pricey- for us, the end user. And also, let's be honest: the flight sim community isn't as strong now as it was three, four or five years ago, let alone when FS9/FSX was in it's prime -but you know those numbers way better than I do.
Yes, 'payware anything' sells, but that's only because of dedicated flight simmers that were here before. Not many new faces are walking through that flight sim door anymore imo. I would bet the demographic for flight simming would confirm that statement also.
Maybe these are not a great ideas or thoughts, but you did ask for feedback. And by reading tonight, most members here are either too afraid to speak up, or need a fire lit under their arse, so I felt compelled to reply now.
Contract or expand on as you see fit and profitable, and what makes the bottom line possible. Just don't go scrap-happy just yet...lol.
thanks.
steve
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Captain
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, October 03, 2021 2:48:46 AM
Posts: 60,
Visits: 145
|
|
Did a couple of circuit training flights last night. For kicks, I tried one out in a 757, not a good idea imo, because by looking at the flight map, I was nowhere close to my marks .
But it was kind of fun, I have to admit- it's tricky to keep it level at low altitude (under 5000, @ approx. 250 kts.), make your turns (without steep banking), then decrease speed going onto final, then coast in at around 140 with the correct amount of flaps and touchdown onto your start spot (or close to it) -all without using autopilot.
A nice challenge. Unconventional (and definitely not normal ) for circuit training yes, but fun and interesting at the same time for me.
Glad this 'circuit training thing' got brought up, and I hope that the circuit training sticks around FSFS in one form or another.
Edit: speed under 10k = 250
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Training Captain
Group: Moderators
Last Login: Tuesday, December 20, 2022 2:42:12 PM
Posts: 1,645,
Visits: 14,276
|
|
Hi all..
Nice and interesting discussion you guys have here - mind if I butt in? - thought not
Steve. I disagree that the flight sim community is not as strong as 3-5 years ago. I think its as strong as ever. It´s a bit more fragmented, people flying FSX, P3D, X-Plane, and all the handheld sims, which are getting steadily better, and stronger. But I believe, and I actually talk to a lot of sim pilots on various forums, social sites and in VA´s, that people are as many, and as dedicated as always. And the amount of fantastic addons (some of then almost as good as FSFlyingSchool) presented to us, both sceneries, utilities, and the most wonderful detailed aircraft, are getting heavier and heavier...
My 2 cents. and now...
I do not think Mr. Smith should be thrown out of evaluating circuits. A terrible idea We NEED Smith to torture us on those circuits. heck... we DEMAND that it be left on.
But in terms of lessons. I love the idea. I have many years ago, pestered SL about making a FSFlyingSchool SCHOOL, where lessons would be, ranging from easy pies, to dead hard, and ENDING with a "FSFlyingSchool pilot license" A full solo flight closely followed by Mr. Smith, in which you need to perform what the lessons have tought you, AND also if possibly, a theoretical test, and those two in conjunction (when passed) would give you the above mentioned pilot license.
AND it could be done for a GA aircraft, then a medium turbo prop, an regional jet -and a heavy metal thing.... so you really had something to work on on those long winter nights.
Just an ancient thought, resurfaced by this great discussion. 
Regards
Ole Andreasen, Denmark
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Pilot
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Sunday, November 05, 2017 9:15:01 AM
Posts: 9,
Visits: 265
|
|
Sorry for the very late reply. I have not used the Machado lessons. Even though I have had FSSchool for some time, I have had very little time to use it lately due to family issues (Had to move my Wife to permanent memory care and it really messed up our lives). I am not even sure I have the latest version (3.1.0 for P3D 2.4. I plan to order the X-Plane version as soon as my life calms down, which will be quite awhile yet.
Anyway, I was just commenting that it would be very appealing to me to have lessons as I go along and be taught the proper way to fly, land, takeoff etc. Having lessons for runway markers etc. would be great also. I have the "Getting around on the ground 3.0" from Aviation Tutorials which is very good but it would be nice to have lessons in one package such as FSSchool.
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool PPL
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Saturday, May 21, 2022 9:15:14 PM
Posts: 11,
Visits: 34
|
|
| Hi Jeff just saw this great idea! As a instructor once said "A good pilot is always learning"!
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Developer
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Saturday, September 28, 2024 9:27:47 AM
Posts: 5,065,
Visits: 9,199
|
|
Thanks folks - we are certainly looking into doing formal lessons - will of course keep you posted!
Jeff Preston ('Squadron Leader') - FSFlyingSchool Publisher & Lead Developer
FSFlyingSchool 2023 for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FSFlyingSchool 2023 for X-Plane 12 & 11
FS Instant Approach 2023 for X-Plane 12 & 11 (Windows)
FSFlyingSchool PRO 2020 Prepar3D v 5
FSFlyingSchool PRO 2019 FSX, FSX-SE, FS2004
FSFlyingSchool USA for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FS Instant Approach 2019 for X-Plane 11 (Mac)
FS Instant Approach for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FS Instant Help for FSX, FS2004
Winner of 5 consecutive PC Pilot Magazine 'Classic Product' Awards
Fly like the Pros with X-Plane, Flight Simulator and Prepar3D!
If you wish to unsubscribe simply reply to email with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the SUBJECT line.
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Pilot
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 10, 2015 4:33:56 PM
Posts: 3,
Visits: 15
|
|
What about making any tolerances adjustable, similar to the way radar contact does, or perhaps have three alternative tolerance values, easy moderate and challenging, that way you can work through the lessons without losing interest due to the high demands of the instructor. I found the lessons in the sim OK up to a point, and managed fine to get the PP level, but moving on to the IFR level was difficult, not because the parameters were hard, but it wasn't at all clear exactly what was expected, there were some online resources that explained what was needed which helped a lot, but it would have been better if it was more apparent from within the program, I think that is something to consider with FSFS. Beyond that I think the addition of actual lessons (which in fact is what I thought I was getting when I bought it!) would greatly enhance the current program, it's got my vote anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Developer
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Saturday, September 28, 2024 9:27:47 AM
Posts: 5,065,
Visits: 9,199
|
|
Hi Kim:
Many thanks for your ideas!
Yes - I think it is key that the pilot knows what is expected from the instructor in lessons. I've heard from a lot of folks who were frustrated by, if I recall correctly, the FSX instructor saying "This isn't going well..." and ending the lesson for the pilot.
It's a very, very complex situation to simulate and there must be limits to what the software can do, but it can be frustrating when you get feedback that is not explained.
FSFlyingSchool itself, without doubt, contains many areas where this occurs (not telling the pilot in detail exactly why the instructor does everything he/she does), as there are limits to what we can, as a business, profitably concentrate on.
For example - do we add new, exciting, demanding features for folks who want to fly SIDs, STARs, DME arcs and holding patterns, or do we add a new layer to explain what "rotate", "stall" and "ballooning" mean...?
We have plenty of fans in one group, lots in another and of course many in both.
As to having several levels of difficulty, this is indeed a promising area. One has to avoid traps such as "I passed the PPL test, but on the 'easy' level", as, we might ask ourselves, "what does that mean?".
Of course the lessons could be arranged in sets of increasing difficulty, as are the lessons in FSX itself.
As for overall tolerances of the instructor in the product (not referring here to lessons as such), we've tried to strike a balance between, on the one hand, having instructors who expect near perfection and on the other, having things so flexible that it leads to folks with a lot of time on their hands creating YouTube movies showing how little the instructor complains about the worst airmanship ever seen. For tolerances to be adjustable is again a promising area.
This may be of interest - I once received an email from a fellow who complained that our instructors "talk too much". I've flown myself, am familiar with real flight instruction and I know that our instructors can be pretty chatty at times, but of course the key point is that we are trying to help people get more from flight simulation, which suffers in that it is most usually done in, for example, a bedroom, rather than a Beechcraft, and as such, the simulator pilot needs a lot of help with things that would be self evident if actually up there in the skies.
Jeff Preston ('Squadron Leader') - FSFlyingSchool Publisher & Lead Developer
FSFlyingSchool 2023 for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FSFlyingSchool 2023 for X-Plane 12 & 11
FS Instant Approach 2023 for X-Plane 12 & 11 (Windows)
FSFlyingSchool PRO 2020 Prepar3D v 5
FSFlyingSchool PRO 2019 FSX, FSX-SE, FS2004
FSFlyingSchool USA for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FS Instant Approach 2019 for X-Plane 11 (Mac)
FS Instant Approach for Microsoft Flight Simulator
FS Instant Help for FSX, FS2004
Winner of 5 consecutive PC Pilot Magazine 'Classic Product' Awards
Fly like the Pros with X-Plane, Flight Simulator and Prepar3D!
If you wish to unsubscribe simply reply to email with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the SUBJECT line.
|
|
|
|
|
FSFlyingSchool Pilot
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: Friday, April 10, 2015 4:33:56 PM
Posts: 3,
Visits: 15
|
|
Thanks for the clear reply SL! With regard to levels (for want of a better term) you could make any "Pass" inherent on qualifying at the top level, the lower levels having a training and toning up exercise, something like that. The top level does not mean it has to be silly hard, just the most realistic.
That was the main problem with the built in school, if you strayed from the expected line for more than a minute or so, it quit the flight, and you could be non the wiser as to why, most frustrating. A slightly more relaxed sub level might enable sim pilots to get to grips with the concepts a little easier.
This is just a thought and I can only imagine how challenging it must be to write and execute a program so that all are relatively happy, so please accept my response for what it is, just another notion.
|
|
|
|