Today on Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, I’m at Homey Airport (KXTA), also known as Groom Lake, aka “Area 51.” I’ve come here to the remote Nevada desert to fly one of the most iconic top secret aircraft of all time: the F-117 Nighthawk stealth fighter.

The story of the F-117 begins in 1964, when Soviet mathematician Pyotr Ufimtsev published the paper, Method of Edge Waves in the Physical Theory of Diffraction. It demonstrated that the radar return from an object depended more on its shape than size. Given the technology at the time, Ufimtsev’s insight was dismissed as impractical in Russia. But by the 1970s, given friendly aircraft losses to SAMs (surface-to-air missiles) in Vietnam and the Middle East, engineers at Lockheed’s “Skunk Works”—famous for designing cutting edge military planes like the P-38 Lighting, U-2 spy plane, and F-104 Starfighter—began taking the idea seriously.

• READ MORE: Reaching Uncharted Corners of the Globe in a Fokker F.VII

One key to minimizing radar return was to replace conventional streamlined, rounded surfaces with flat, angled surfaces designed to scatter radar waves in different directions. The wings would be swept back at a steep angle, like an arrowhead, and the vertical stabilizer (tail fin) replaced by an angled V-tail, all to reduce its radar profile.

The two turbofan jet engines were placed above the wings to shield their heat signature from the ground. The flat, reflective surfaces of the turbofan itself were shielded by an intake grill (to the right).

The engines have special exhaust ports in the rear to shield and minimize the heat released. The F-117 has no afterburners to give it extra thrust, as this would defeat the purpose of nondetection.

Instead of slinging weapons and bombs outside the fuselage, they are stored in an interior bay, safe from radar detection. Even opening the bay doors dramatically increases the F-117’s radar profile, so it must only be done for a few seconds over a target. Additionally, the exterior surfaces of the F-117 are all covered in a special coating, designed to absorb and deflect radar waves. The fork-like prongs jutting from the front of the F-117 are sensors to detect airspeed, angle of attack, and other instrument readings. The F-117 has no radar, which would immediately give away its presence. The glass panel in front of the cockpit is an infrared “eye” that enables the pilot to see in the dark and guide bombs to their target.

The windows of the F-117’s cockpit are ingrained with gold, which allows radar waves in but not out. Examples of the F-117’s cockpit are now on display in museums, and the layout is fairly similar to other single-pilot combat airplanes.

• READ MORE: Exploring the Checkered History of the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter

Initially a “black project” funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), starting in 1975, Lockheed cobbled together two prototypes under the code name “Hopeless Diamond,” which first flew in 1977. Although both prototypes crashed, the project was a sufficient enough success to proceed with a production model, which took its first flight from Area 51 in 1981. The first airplanes were delivered to the U.S. Air Force in 1982.

The radar-minimizing design features of the F-117 make it quite unstable to fly. In fact, it can really only be flown with computer assistance, using a fly-by-wire system derived from the F-16. Because of its difficult aerodynamics, the F-117 quickly gained the nickname “Frisbee” or “Wobblin’ Goblin.”

The shielding of its jet engines, and lack of afterburners, also means that the F-117 is subsonic (it cannot break the speed of sound), making it much slower than most conventional fighters. In fact, despite its designation, the F-117 is not a fighter meant to intercept and dogfight with enemy airplanes. It has no guns, and though in theory it could carry air-to-air missiles, its lack of radar would render them fairly useless.

• READ MORE: The Story of the Schneider Trophy and the Supermarine S.5

The “Stealth Fighter” is actually an attack aircraft or light bomber, intended to be used in covert missions or evade air defenses, mainly under the cover of night. Some say that the “fighter” designation was used to attract pilots to the program who would normally have preferred flying fighters over bombers.

After testing at Homey, the F-117 was assigned to a special secret unit at Tonopah Test Range, also in Nevada. A total of 64 combat-ready airplanes were eventually built. Throughout the 1980s, however, the F-117 was kept completely secret. While rumors and sightings of it abounded, the U.S. government refused to confirm that any such aircraft existed. The first acknowledged use of the F-117 in combat was during the U.S. invasion of Panama to topple dictator Manuel Noriega in 1989.

Before I elaborate on its combat history, I need to land this airplane. The F-117 doesn’t have any flaps or air brakes to slow it down. I pull the throttle back to nearly idle just to descend. The approach speed of the F-117 is really fast—around 250 knots—and it touches down at 180 knots. So on landing I pull a handle next to the landing gear to deploy a parachute, to slow me down in time.

Now let’s talk about the known combat record of the F-117. It’s 3 a.m.  on January 17, 1991. Just over a day since the coalition deadline for Saddam Hussein to withdraw his Iranian forces from Kuwait has expired. An F-117 flies over the desert just south of Baghdad.

F-117s are leading the first strike of the coalition air campaign in the first Gulf War, aimed at taking out key command and control installations in the Iraqi capital. With a radar reflection the size of a golf ball, the F-117 glides silent and unseen over the bends of the Tigris River toward its target. Meanwhile, Iraqi anti-aircraft guns fire blindly into the night sky—a scene I remember watching unfold live on TV as I sat in my college dorm room. Combat losses for the F-117 that first night were projected at 5 percent. In fact, every single one of them came back from their missions safely.

By the end of the first Gulf War, the F-117 had flown 1,300 sorties, hitting an estimated 1,600 high-value targets, with the loss of a single aircraft. Though some of its performance may have been exaggerated—initial estimates of 80 percent target accuracy were scaled back to 40-60 percent—the F-117 became a leading symbol of the U.S. technological edge that helped establish it as the world’s sole superpower going into the 1990s.

• READ MORE: Recreating the Final Flight of the Red Baron

Fast-forward to the evening of March 27, 1999. At Aviano Air Base in northern Italy, an F-117 prepares for another night of bombing Yugoslavia, as part of NATO’s intervention to compel Serbian forces to withdraw from Kosovo. The aircraft, call sign “Vega 31,” is flown by Lieutenant Colonel Darrell Patrick “Dale” Zelko, a Desert Storm veteran. His target is a command-and-control center in downtown Belgrade, the Serbian capital. Along with several other F-117s on similar missions, he will fly east across Slovenia and Hungary before refueling midair and turning south to enter Yugoslav airspace.

I’ve heard the story two ways. The first has Zelko approaching Belgrade from the northwest and being picked up by Serbian radar as he opened his bomb bay doors—presumably before he could hit his assigned target. The second version, which the pilot himself tells, has him skirting Romanian airspace and coming toward Belgrade from the east. He dropped his bombs on target then continued west to head back home. (From what I can gather, Zelko was actually quite a bit higher than I’m portraying here, and there was a cloud layer about 2,000 feet above the ground.)

Just south of the two in Ruma in the countryside west of Belgrade, a mobile S-125 Neva SAM unit detected the F-117, despite its stealth profile, and locked on. Two SAMs were fired. The first missed the cockpit by inches, and the proximity fuse somehow failed to trigger. The second hit one wing and sent the F-117 tumbling out of control. After an initial struggle, the pilot ejected, was able to evade Serbian ground forces, and was rescued by U.S. helicopters. Years later, Zelko met the man who commanded the SAM unit that shot him down, and the two became friends.

Interestingly, the U.S. did not take any steps to destroy the wreckage of the downed F-117. The official reason was that the technology was already out of date, and there was no rationale to fear it falling into enemy hands. While the F-117 Nighthawk was used in 2001 in Afghanistan, and again in 2003 over Iraq, it became increasingly clear that it was nearing the end of its useful days, soon to be replaced by newer aircraft like the F-22 and F-35 that incorporate further advances in stealth technology. In 2006, the U.S. Air Force announced that it was retiring the F-117 and began putting the fleet into storage. A few went to museums, and others began being scrapped.

However, in recent years, there have been a number of sightings of F-117s flying near Edwards Air Base near California’s Death Valley. Some were reportedly painted grayish white, earning them the nickname “ghosts.” It is widely suspected that these F-117s are taking part in exercises designed to train pilots to detect and intercept enemy stealth aircraft. For fans of the iconic “Stealth Fighter,” it’s gratifying to know that some of them still appear to be flying.

In its entire operational life, there was only one known F-117 shot down. Its time may have passed, but that’s a remarkable record.

If you’d like to see a version of this story with more historical photos and screenshots, you can check out my original post here. This story was told utilizing Aerial Simulations’ F-117 Nighthawk add-on to Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, along with liveries and scenery downloaded for free from the flightsim.to community.

The post Reenacting Bombing Missions in an F-117 Nighthawk appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

One of the greatest values of having a home flight simulator is being able to use it when you only have an hour—or less—of free time. Since you can easily select any two airports within a reasonably short flying distance of one another, sometimes the near-unlimited choice results in decision paralysis, especially after a busy day in the real world.

To mitigate that, I chose two short flights that can be accomplished in a normal evening’s flight sim session. My selection criteria was to fly my first flight in New England, between two airports that I flew out of when I was training to complete my private pilot certificate. The second flight was a departure and destination in a part of the world where I had zero experience and no prior knowledge of the topography. The idea was to use the first flight of the evening as a warmup with the familiar and then end the night with the challenge of the unknown.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

To add to the fun, I met up with a friend of mine from college in the Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 (MSFS2020) multiplayer environment so that we could pilot the flights together in a very loose formation. My friend was just getting back into flight simulation after many years away from the hobby. We used Discord, the free communication app, to stay connected during the flights. Although we flew on MSFS2020, these flights are software-agnostic, and you can easily fly them on X-Plane 11 or XP12. Across both flights, there was only a short time spent in cruise, allowing all phases of the flight to occur quickly, adding to the challenge of staying ahead of the airplane. As a result, both flights delivered adequate feelings of accomplishment and a chance to enjoy a fun, aviation-themed experience from home.

Flight 1, The Familiar: New England Island Hop

• Purpose: Sightseeing
• Software: MSFS2020 with free enhanced airports from www.Flightsim.to
• Route: Departed Nantucket (KACK) Runway 24 to Katama Airpark (1B2) Runway 3
• Aircraft: Cessna 208 Caravan
• Conditions: Summer; live weather, adjusted to midday at noon local time
• Distance: 22 nm
• Time en route: 14 minutes
• Modification: If you are interested in roughly doubling your flight time, I recommend you depart from Block Island (KBID), especially if you have never flown out of the 2,500-foot runway.

After getting Discord set up outside of the flight sim environment, we met up on the ramp at Nantucket, Massachusetts (KACK), using the multiplayer function in MSFS2020. My friend’s father was an active pilot during his childhood and even flew one of the B-17s that toured the country during the 1980s and ’90s.

Since we both share an interest in all things aviation, I jumped at the opportunity to welcome him back into the exciting world of flight simulation, especially considering all the advances made since the flight sims of our college days. Neither of us had tried the multiplayer function in MSFS2020 before, and I was eager to fly with some company since most of my flights from home are solo endeavors, save for the excitement and immersion offered by live ATC services provided by VATSIM and PilotEdge that I regularly layer into my experiences for added realism and a chance to practice on the radio.

• READ MORE: Our Pilots of the Future May Share Sim Stories

For our first flight, we selected the venerable Cessna 208 Caravan, a popular island-hopping aircraft with robust landing gear, which seemed like an ideal choice for our destination. Sitting in our cold and dark aircraft, my friend suggested that I try the digital checklist function in MSFS2020, which is accessed by clicking the icon in the menu bar near the top of your screen once you are loaded into an airplane. Having never flown the Caravan, the digital checklist features a small “eye” icon to the right of the instructions listed. Clicking the “eye” causes the camera to cleanly sweep to the individual button, switch, or lever you need to operate to perform the checklist item. Using the “eye” icon provided a visual flow of the checklist during engine start and helped me understand the layout of the cockpit and controls.

Alternatively, you can use your mouse or hat switch on your yoke to move the camera manually to each item in the cockpit, but the “eye” was much faster and more convenient. Many general aviation aircraft in MSFS and X-Plane offer in-depth systems modeling, making the start-up experience a learning opportunity for the curious sim pilot. On the evening before I try a new airplane, I search for a start-up procedure video on YouTube, just to get familiar ahead of time. @JonBeckett’s channel on YouTube offers both videos and checklists to help get you started. For many years, I used a physical paper checklist in-sim but recently started using the ForeFlight checklist function on the iPad mounted in my flight sim cockpit.

Even though it is another piece of technology to manage, I like the green check mark that is displayed next to each completed item in the ForeFlight checklist. This shows your progress, making it easier to see if you skipped a step. You can also edit a checklist in ForeFlight. I added reminders to complete a takeoff briefing before departure and tap the brakes during climbout to halt the wheels from spinning before raising the landing gear. The sim is an ideal environment to become comfortable with new checklist behaviors, and I have enough practice that I am ready to try it on a future real-world flight.

After engine start, my friend and I taxied our Caravans to Runway 24 for takeoff. We opted for a formation takeoff, and I found it very difficult to stay within 500 feet of my friend’s aircraft. I could immediately tell why formation flying requires a lot of training and how challenging it must be to hone this skill in the real world.

Departing KACK in the Cessna 208 Caravan

Once in the air, we turned west over the ocean toward Katama Airpark (1B2), located on the southeastern corner of nearby Martha’s Vineyard. A popular real-world New England fly-in destination, Katama features a short taxiway connected to a grass parking area right next to the beach, making it one of few beach-side general aviation airports accessible to private aircraft in New England.

I selected Runway 3 as I had landed on it a few times with my instructor during my private pilot flight training a decade earlier. I hadn’t been back to visit Katama in the sim yet, so I hoped my memory of the real-world location would help me with my visual approach. It was a short flight across Nantucket Sound, and I opted for a 2,000-foot cruising altitude, keeping our two-ship flight VFR below a broken line of puffy, fair weather clouds at 2,500 feet that stretched south of the island out into the Atlantic Ocean.

Turning Final for Runway 3 at Katama Airpark (1B2)

Since I use a single 4K 55-inch TV screen as my main monitor, I supplement my situational awareness with ForeFlight on my tablet and my Real Sim Gear G1000 PFD and MFD sitting in my Stay Level Avionix panel. Using all of this information together kept me from overflying the right-base-to-final approach turn, and I rolled out on a 3-mile final with “030” bugged on my heading indicator. Spotting Runway 3 is an interesting visual exercise in both the real and flight sim world.

• READ MORE: Taking a Virtual Flight with the Yawman Arrow

The runways at Katama are neatly cut from the flora of a large field. As there are fields that border the airpark on both the left and right sides, I double-checked to make sure I was lined up with the correct one.

Although Runway 3 is 50 feet wide and 3,700 feet long, it looks narrower and shorter from the air. The light winds kept the last few hundred feet of my approach stable, and I checked to make sure I was at 75 knots, with full flaps and prop full forward. I was interested to find out if grass had been modeled differently than pavement, as the surface in the real world typically requires a soft-field landing, slightly nose high, to minimize the vibration on the aircraft’s landing gear.

With one last trim adjustment before touching down, the Caravan’s muscular suspension deftly swallowed up any surface undulations that may or may not have been modeled, and I let the aircraft roll out to the end of the runway, where I turned around in time to watch my friend come in for his landing.

I particularly enjoy landing at airfields that I have flown into in real life, using the flight sim’s digital version as a bridge back to a memory from my real-world logbook. However, one of the many benefits of home flight simulation is the option to leave behind the familiar and try new destinations in unfamiliar parts of the world. The only cost is your time, and selecting from any of the 37,000 registered airports in MSFS2020 can spark some anxiety of choice, which often leads me to stay in New England, where I have the most real-world flying experience.

But such “comfort zone” behavior does a disservice to a world full of new airport destinations, re-created in impressive detail, waiting just beyond the click of a mouse.

Flight 2, The Unfamiliar: Skagway to Haines, Alaska

• Purpose: Sightseeing
• Software: MSFS2020
• Route: Departed Skagway (PAGY) Runway 20 to Haines (PAHN) Runway 26
• Aircraft: Beechcraft Baron BE58
• Conditions: October; live weather, marginal VFR, light rain, 4 p.m. local time
• Distance: 19 nm
• Time en route: 15 minutes
• Modification: Consider departing from PAHN and then returning to Skagway (PAGY) to try landing on Runway 2. The airport at Skagway sits at 44 feet msl but is ringed by 5,000-plus-foot peaks, making it an intimidating approach but visually stunning.

My friend from college spent part of his formative years living outside of Seattle. An Alaskan cruise with his wife found them departing as passengers in a single-engine GA aircraft out of a small airport called Skagway (PAGY), located roughly 65 nm north of Juneau in a mountainous and glacial region of Alaska near the Canadian border and Coast Mountains. It would have taken me decades of sim flying to find Skagway, and when my friend described the unique geography of steep mountains rising around three sides of the airport, it sounded like the ideal unfamiliar departure point for our next flight.

With live weather enabled, my friend and I met up on the ramp in marginal VFR conditions with light rain and 3 miles visibility. Despite the weather being definitely below my personal minimums in the real world, the conditions gave us a chance to test our visual navigation skills as we flew down the Taiya Inlet to Haines Airport (PAHN). Climbing out of Skagway in the MSFS Baron, I had all the de-icing equipment and pitot heat on as a precaution and was cruising at 3,000, well below the 5,000-foot ridges, to avoid the clouds.

The light rain stopped, and the weather in-sim improved as we approached the town of Haines, and I had a clearer picture of the mountain peaks through the remaining tattered clouds. Beautiful was an understatement, and I used my camera commands to look out over the wings for a better view. The geography of Haines was no less striking than Skagway, and both airports should be on your short list if you have never explored Alaska in the real world or flight simulator. MSFS pulls local METARs when using live weather, and I cross-referenced the information on ForeFlight. The winds were coming from the west out of 220 degrees at 23 knots, providing a 40-degree left crosswind for landing on Runway 26. We chose a flight path that had us make a right turn over Haines toward the airport located northwest of town. My friend opted for a 3-mile right base to final.

Wanting a closer view of the mountains to the west of the airfield, I flew southwest over the Chilkat Inlet. Being mindful of the peaks to the west and blowing snow that was starting to lower visibility, I turned back toward the airport and descended to traffic pattern altitude, which I had set using my altitude selector on the Garmin G1000 PFD. I entered the pattern using a standard 45-degree entry to a left downwind for Runway 26. Consequently, that also gave me a great view of my friend’s aircraft on final approach.

We kept it mostly quiet on the comms for landing, but my friend mentioned the strong crosswind on final. Turning from left base to final, I double-checked that my fuel selectors were on, verified my gear was down, mixtures were set to full, and I moved the Baron’s props to full forward. The strong westerly wind was pushing me off the centerline of 26, which I started correcting with rudder and aileron. I opted for approach flaps only and worked pretty hard to touch down on the left rear wheel first. My Virtual Fly YOKO+ flight yoke builds up mechanical resistance as you approach the edges of the control travel, providing valuable immersion during high workload moments like short final. I landed a bit off the centerline but kept the Baron out of the snowy grass and taxied to the end of the runway, having needed most of the 4,000 feet available.

The unfamiliar geography, marginal VFR conditions, and crosswind on final provided plenty of challenges for a short flight, reminding me how much the home sim experience has to offer. Add to that the unexpected challenges of live dynamic weather, and there were a lot of variables to be managed during the 20-minute flight.

Sometime this winter when the weather in the real world is below your minimums, load up MSFS or X-Plane and try one of the innumerable short flights to a new destination. I hope you enjoy the exploration. Let us know your favorite short flight aircraft/airport combination by writing to edit@flying.media.

Quick MSFS2020 Tips

Visit www.flightsim.to and search for the airports you will be using for your flight. The flight sim community has built enhancements of all kinds to the base Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 sim experience, including both free and payware.

You may find free upgraded airport scenery that you can download and place into your MSFS2020 community folder so that it will be loaded automatically for your flight. Run a search for how to find your community folder, and then set the location as a favorite so you can find it easily in the future.

This column first appeared in the January-February 2024/Issue 945 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Here Are 2 Quick VFR Flights to Try on Your Home Flight Simulator appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Redbird Flight Simulations and the Recreational Aviation Foundation (RAF) have launched a new initiative that will foster the creation of training materials supporting recreational flying, including backcountry trips.

“The pilot shortage has caused many flight training providers to focus their operations primarily on recruiting and training professional pilot candidates,” said Charlie Gregoire, Redbird’s president and chief operations officer. “Consequently, pilots interested in pursuing recreational flying opportunities are left with little support beyond the typical $100 hamburger run. This new initiative with the RAF will broaden exposure to the many flying activities outside of training for a new certificate or rating, and arm pilots with information for how to approach them safely.”

• READ MORE: Recreational Aviation Foundation Remains the Sum of Its Hearts

Since 2006 Redbird has been building basic aviation training devices (BATDs) and advanced aviation training devices (AATDs) to supplement the educational process. The AATDs are used around the world by pilots, flight schools, colleges and universities, and K-12 programs.

The RAF was founded by a group of Montana pilots who realized that the threat of recreational airstrip closures was of national concern. The group is dedicated to preserving existing airstrips and creating new public-use recreational airstrips throughout the U.S.

The two entities are creating a catalog of resources covering topics such as practical flying skills and habits, planning and preparation, basic survival and first aid, and gear recommendations and usage.

Among the topics to be presented are: 

• What to pack and avoid packing for recreational flying adventures
• How to evaluate a potential landing zone
• How to read the wind without ATIS (or even a windsock)
• When to land (or not land) with a tailwind
• Nonstandard traffic patterns
• Basic first aid and triage
• Leave-no-trace and good-neighbor flying

How It Will Work

Over the next 18 months, Redbird will be releasing the material in written and video formats at no cost to pilots or training providers. In addition the organizations are collaborating on the creation of training scenarios for Redbird’s subscription-based personalized proficiency training app, Redbird Pro.

• READ MORE: We Fly: The RAF at 20 Years into Moose Creek

“This partnership with Redbird is exciting and yet one more piece in the aviation puzzle,” said John McKenna, RAF chairman. “We hope this excites a few more folks about aviation and perhaps the joy of recreational flying.”

For those lucky enough to be at this week’s Sun ‘n Fun Aerospace Expo in Lakeland, Florida, Redbird has a special edition of its MX2 aviation training device with a custom RAF livery on display to raise awareness of the initiative. The organizations are showcasing it in the Redbird booth (NE-51, NE-52).

In July, the device will be on display at EAA AirVenture in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. Pilots and prospective pilots are welcome to demo the device and try their hand at a series of recreational flying scenarios.

The post Redbird, Recreational Aviation Foundation Partner to Boost Backcountry Flight Training appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

In 1981 when the first Microsoft Flight Simulator was born, I was a young teenager—the spirit of adventure and realism of flight hit me like a storm. Suddenly, my intense model railroad hobby, complete with a huge basement layout, took a back seat. This technical marvel, hosted on this heavy, metal box of a newfangled PC, captured my heart and imagination forever. I wonder if my parents were grateful for this weekend “babysitter” as my dad hauled his computer home from his office for me to play with on Friday nights. It certainly kept me home and out of trouble, with no mischief or calls from the local police late at night.

I was obsessed. Once college approached, I knew I was going to become an airline pilot, and I wouldn’t stop until I was an old man flying a Boeing 747. I was originally going to go to college to become a TV meteorologist, but failing grades in math kept that dream far away. I found it much easier to get into a state college with an aviation program, so off I went to one in New England to become a pilot.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

While earning all my primary ratings, private through commercial and CFII, Microsoft Flight Simulator was right there with me. It provided all I needed for that extra boost when studying ILSs, holding patterns, VOR tracking, stalls, slow flight, cross countries, and more. Once the newer versions of MSFS were released (these major new versions were anticipated and sold in PC software stores in malls back then), it would cause so much excitement and anxiety for me that I’d be prepared to drive hours to get the coveted box in hand before the stores ran out, or other friends I knew grabbed theirs. Then the worries over computer strength and how the new version would run upped the anxiety. But it was a fun time back then, one that blew past any young child’s Christmas morning memory on any new release day.

After acing my IFR rating (the CFIs never understood how I knew all this stuff prior to beginning flying), my next big “ace event” was years later during my first real job as a Cape Air captain flying a nine-seat Cessna 402. I had to go for weeks of indoc and training, and my monthlong-stay hotel room was filled with some great multiengine hardware. Throttle quadrants, rudder pedals, and all were a fixture in my small room along with the PC. Today, I highly recommend the Sporty’s Pilot Shop Flight Sim Starter Set—quality Honeycomb equipment—or FLYING’s custom rig.

• READ MORE: Ultimate Realism ‘X-posed’ in 747-200 Classic

Some fellow classmates came to observe or try engine failures in a Cessna 421 add-on, the closest thing we had to the lower-powered 402. But it all worked and made sense. My multiengine failures and a simulated ATP check ride—complete with many single-engine NDB approaches to minimums in the real airplane—all seemed easy to me as I was able to fly all this before. The heck with imaginary “armchair flying”—I had the real thing in my hotel room as far as I was concerned.

Years later, once again another big event was my initial type rating in my first jet—the Beechjet 400A—in Wichita, Kansas. Most folks get a full initial type school of more than three weeks for most bizjets. However, my Part 135 boss was a cheapskate (imagine that) and wanted me typed within a four-day recurrent session the other pilots get every year. That was a lot to accomplish. The instructors said they didn’t think I could do it, as nobody gets a type off a recurrent session. And since it was my first jet rating, I had to take the four-day FMS ground training event as well.

Learning an aircraft FMS is the hardest thing for new jet pilots, and I had no time to learn it. Well, I said let me try the sim and see how I do in the FMS. I had a secret weapon nobody knew about. I had been using an FMS for years in MSFS, thanks to PMDG (www.PMDG.com), the makers of the finest Boeing airliners for the sim platform. Once I was in the real Beechjet sim, I discovered, sure enough, the FMS is exactly like the one in the Boeing jets. Even the glass cockpit was similar. The instructors were dumbfounded as to how I could suddenly bang away at all the keys, programming and modifying all the while learning to fly the jet. I let the cat out of the bag and told them, thanks to me being a geek on MSFS, I had learned all this years ago. They’re reaction was “no way” … but I was told to go ahead and skip the FMS course. I got my type rating in four days!

There was a fairly good Beechjet add-on for MSFS2004 made by Eaglesoft, and I used it during this training event and subsequent recurrents as I became a captain for the 135 outfit I flew with for several years before getting a new type rating on a big, beefy Dassault Falcon 2000 eventually. Sadly, no Falcon products existed for any sim platform, so I was a bit overwhelmed during that initial type rating. But, as most flying jobs change, so did this one. I was suddenly changing jobs and getting typed in a Hawker 800 series—a bit of a step back from the big Falcon.

Now, once again I had the sim advantage as one did exist from designer Carenado (www.carenado.com). The Hawker 850 was out for MSFSX at the time, and it was excellent in preparing me for the overall layout, look, and feel for learning the cockpit. However, it was not too big on exact systems modeling, so I used it as more of a visual familiarization tool than anything else, as well as for some basic flying qualities I believed were probably modeled pretty well.

Soon that 135 job ended, as those old 800s were poorly maintained and most flights were an exercise in using the emergency section of the POH. So I quit, only to find a job flying a much newer, late model Hawker 850, exactly as I had in MSFSX. This was a hoot. The newness and power was so much greater than the older sister. But that new boss suddenly traded in the 850XP for a big, powerful Challenger 300. This was the pinnacle of my career back then, and I had yet another sim weapon—the incredible Challenger 300 for X-Plane 11.

This favorite of many was sadly discontinued years ago, but I used it to the fullest extent while it was available. Systems, operations, layout, and flying quality were all simulated. I became extremely familiar with the CL300 during this time, and once I was type rated and flying the real thing, I became a reviewer of the X-Plane version. I was even able to help the author a bit on tweaking some parameters to better equal the real jet.

But the more I flew the real thing, the more I realized how well done the X-Plane version really was. I used to think it was too powerful, easily performing initial climb rates hitting 10,000 fpm, then I found out, yes, indeed the real thing does it too. What a ride!

Now that sims have helped me learn the real aircraft I fly, what about other stuff? How about life and death? Through no fault of my own, or perhaps a clumsy error, or maybe being even wreckless a bit while flying on the PC, I have found myself in sudden potentially dangerous scenarios that require immediate thinking and problem solving. I often leave the airplane on autopilot to do other things but have returned on a few occasions to discover one or more engines have failed for some reason. In jets it could be because of high-altitude weather, lack of anti-icing items being used, or other issues. Now I must think and react as a real pilot.

Even without a checklist at hand, it’s a brain exercise that is nothing but beneficial. So in a way, that is an actual emergency not planned at all and definitely a surprise. In smaller airplanes I have experienced total loss of power, so a visual landing off airport is an incredible “big picture” situational awareness type of tool that’s very realistic. I have written about such emergencies in past issues of FLYING’s digital platform.

Actual live weather feeding can provide an unexpected moment. So now, it’s time to dig out approach plates or perhaps attempt a visual with terrain. How about a planned emergency? Sure can. Options in either MSFS2020 or X-Plane 12 (XP12) give you the ability to randomly have a failure of anything you choose at a specific time, keystroke, or random period. XP12 goes farther and gives you the chance of random bird impact and resulting crisis, with hundreds more just waiting for you to activate. During jet recurrent events, we practice multiple engine failures at V₁, so that is easily something I’ll do in the sims at home.

Get a friend involved to secretly program something bad to happen. Back when I was a single guy and had a fellow roommate pilot pal (Rob, this is you) whom I taught how to fly, we’d call these randomized, intentional moments of doom “horror flights.” We’d set up the other guy while he wasn’t looking to have to fly the Cessna 182 and have total electrical failures combined with vacuum failure at night. Looking up to see nothing but a turn coordinator to live by is terror in IFR. Use engine sound for rpm and wind noise for pitch. If the outcome was bad, we’d throw each other down the stairs to simulate a crash and resulting injury. This added to the fun and realism. I don’t think any of us really lost too much blood.

I have been to many airfields in the real world where I’ve experienced that “been-there-done-that” feeling. Places like KASE, KTEX, KHSP, KJAC, KVNY, KSFO, KTRK, CYVR, PHLI, and dozens more where, if it weren’t for the sim, I’d be a level behind. Most involve high terrain or odd procedures. My first European trips in the Challenger were done in MSFS or X-Plane. Any new places I know of that I am heading to will be at least seen virtually before going in real life.

Every sim session is educational and keeps the brain in “big picture” mode. SA, or situational awareness, is key. I have flown with so many other pilots that lack this skill or are somewhat always behind the jet. A home simulator keeps these skills sharp. You’re always thinking ahead about “What if…?”

You don’t even need the latest MSFS or X-Plane to do this—or a fancy PC. Any version would do. I’d go as far as to say some of the big picture things can even be accomplished with an air combat sim. If you’re always thinking and doing, planning and preparing with a home flight sim, you’re leaps and bounds ahead of the traditional “armchair” pilot.

Going from class to a hotel room, sitting in a chair with a cockpit diagram in hand, isn’t going to cut it. You’re missing the other half.

This column first appeared in the December 2023/Issue 944 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Healthy Obsession: What Flight Sim Has Done for Me appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 I’m going to be flying the Fokker F.VII, one of the world’s first civilian airliners that blazed new paths to uncharted reaches of the globe in the hands of aviators like Richard Byrd and Charles Kingsford Smith.

Anthony Fokker was Dutch, born in the colonial East Indies. In 1910, at age 20, he moved to Germany to pursue his interest in aviation. He soon founded his own airplane company there, and during World War I it designed a number of successful and famous fighter planes for the Germans. Fokker himself was an accomplished pilot. I wrote a previous article on the Fokker Dr.I triplane, which you can check out here.

• READ MORE: Recreating the Final Flight of the Red Baron

After losing WWI, Germany had to surrender all its warplanes and aircraft factories, including Fokker’s factory, under the Treaty of Versailles. Fokker, however, was able to bribe railway and border officials to smuggle some of his equipment back to his native Netherlands. That equipment allowed him to reestablish his company in Holland and design the Fokker F.VII, a single-engine transport for the fledgling postwar civilian market. I’m in one of those models here, in KLM colors, at Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport (EHAM).

The F.VII’s fuselage was fabric stretched over a steel-tube frame. Its wings were plywood-skinned. The original, single-engine version of the F.VII was powered by a variety of different models of radial engines, which ranged from 360 to 480 hp. Inside there was room for eight passengers, as well as a bathroom (the door to my right here).

The cabin was connected to the two-man cockpit by a little door under the fuel tank and starter switches. On the instrument panel, from left to right: oil pressure and temperature, altitude, another oil temperature gauge, air speed indicator (with a turn indicator below it), clock, and rpm tachometer. Around the cockpit you can see all the wires and pulleys connecting the controls to the flight surfaces outside. Turn or push the yoke and they quite clearly move. Fly by wire, indeed. The compass is basically a bowl with a magnet floating in it.

The designer of the initial F.VII was Walter Rethel, who was later hired by Willy Messerschmitt and went on to design the famous Bf 109, the main German fighter at the start of World War II.

With a single engine, even a fairly powerful one for its time, the Fokker F.VII didn’t exactly spring off the ground. It lumbers into the air and climbs gradually. Nevertheless, in the early 1920s, the F.VII became a successful early passenger transport for early airlines such as Dutch KLM and Belgian Sabena. Here I am flying over the historic center of Amsterdam.

In 1924, the F.VII even introduced flights from Amsterdam to the East Indies. Needless to say, it wasn’t nonstop and could take many days.

In 1925, automakers Henry Ford and his son Edsel began the Ford Reliability Tour, a challenge for aircraft to successfully complete a 1,900-mile course across the American Midwest with stops in 10 cities. To compete in Ford’s challenge, and make the airplane more reliable in general, Fokker had the F.VII redesigned to have three engines, adding two mounted on the side struts. The new F.VIIb/3m, decked out here in Sabena colors and flying over Brussels, became immediately popular, with 154 built. Each of the three engines was a 200 hp Wright J-4 Whirlwind.

• READ MORE: Exploring the Checkered History of the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter

Belgian tycoon Alfred Loewenstein, calculated to be the third-richest man in the world at his peak in the 1920s, even owned his own private Fokker F.VII. Flying over the English Channel in 1928, he had one of the most unfortunate bathroom breaks in history. You see, the door to the bathroom (left) is directly across from the door to the outside (right). It seems Loewenstein opened and walked through the wrong one and fell to his death in the water below. Though to this day, some still suspect it was murder. There’s even a book about this incident, The Man Who Fell from the Sky by William Norris.

If that were the sum of the F.VII’s history, it might be pretty uninspiring. But to tell the rest of it, I’m here at Spitsbergen in Norway’s Arctic archipelago of Svalbard for Byrd’s flight to the North Pole. Richard Byrd was a U.S. naval officer who commanded air patrols out of Halifax, Nova Scotia, during WWI. He played an active but supporting role in the first attempts to cross the Atlantic by air, and in 1926 had his big shot at fame. His Fokker F.VIIa/3m, mounted on snow skis, was named the Josephine Ford, after the daughter of Edsel Ford, who helped finance the expedition.

This was a two-man expedition, with Byrd accompanied by Navy Chief Aviation Pilot Floyd Bennett. The passenger seats were torn out and replaced with extra fuel tanks and emergency supplies.

The inside of the cockpit is quite similar to the one-engine version but with three separate throttles and tachometers (showing rpm). There was no airport in Svalbard at the time, so they had to take off from a snow-covered field—hence the skis. Byrd’s flight, from Svalbard and back, took 15 hours and 57 minutes, including 13 minutes spent circling at their farthest north point, which Byrd claimed, based on his sextant readings, to be the North Pole.

Did he really reach the North Pole and become the first to fly over it? This remains hotly disputed to this day, with some researchers claiming that he faked his sextant readings and fell short of his goal. In that case, the true prize would belong to Norwegian Roald Amundsen, already the first to reach the South Pole by land, in his airship Norge.

• READ MORE: The Story of the Schneider Trophy and the Supermarine S.5

A few observations about flying the Fokker F.VII, at least in the sim. First, it’s not very stable, in the sense of wanting to correct back to straight and level flight. It’s sensitive to being loaded either nose-heavy or tail-heavy and requires a lot of control input. Second, that big wing really likes to glide. To descend without overspeeding, I basically have to put all three throttles back to idle and glide down.

Last, there are no differential brakes and no tailwheel. That makes the F.VII extremely hard to control on the ground, even just to taxi. That’s especially true on snow skis.

Whether Byrd truly did reach the North Pole or not, he became a huge national hero when he returned to the U.S. Byrd and Bennett were both presented with the Medal of Honor by then-President Calvin Coolidge at the White House.

The following year in 1927, Byrd outfitted a new Fokker F.VII/3m, named America, to bid for the Orteig Prize, promising $25,000 for the first nonstop flight from New York City to Paris (or vice versa). Anthony Fokker himself had recently moved to the United States and was part of the team preparing Byrd and his crew—the odds-on favorite—for the Atlantic crossing. During practices, however, America—piloted by Fokker himself—crashed, injuring both Byrd and Bennett and postponing their attempt. As a result, while America was being repaired, Charles Lindbergh—an unheard-of underdog—made the flight solo in the Spirit of St. Louis, becoming an aviation legend.

• READ MORE: Simulating a Bombing Raid in an F-16

The Fokker F.VII would still achieve fame, though, crossing a different ocean at the hands of Australian pilot Charles Kingsford Smith in 1928. If you’ve ever passed through Sydney Kingsford Smith Airport (YSSY) and wondered who it’s named after, you’re about to find out. (If you’re an Australian, you already know).

Movie star handsome Smith, known as “Smithy,” fought as a combat engineer at Gallipoli in WWI but soon joined the Royal Air Force as a pilot. He was shot down, injured, and returned to become a flying instructor in Australia. From that day, Smith had a dream to cross the Pacific Ocean by air from the U.S. to Australia. By 1928 he was ready to try to achieve that goal. That’s why I’m here at Oakland Municipal Airport (KOAK) in California, where he took off in his Fokker F.VIIb/3m Southern Cross. Not unlike Byrd’s airplane, the inside has been altered to make space for extra fuel tanks.

At 8:54 a.m. on May 31, 1928, Smith and his four-man crew lifted off from Oakland on the first leg of their journey to Hawaii. At the time, flying to Hawaii, much less Australia, was an extremely daunting prospect. While they had a radio with limited range, there were no radio beacons to guide them. They could only estimate a course based on the latest, often inaccurate, weather reports over the Pacific and hope that unexpected winds wouldn’t blow them off course and make them miss Hawaii entirely. As they flew over the Golden Gate— the bridge hadn’t been built yet—they knew that several aviators before them had estimated wrong and simply vanished into the vastness of the Pacific.

The first stage from Oakland to Hawaii covered 2,400 miles and took 27 hours and 25 minutes (87.54 mph). It was uneventful. But one can only imagine their joy as they arrived here over the northeast shore of Oahu.

They landed at Wheeler Army Airfield in the center of Oahu. The Southern Cross was the first foreign-registered airplane to arrive in Hawaii and was greeted at Wheeler by thousands, including Governor Wallace Rider Farrington. Smith and his crew were put up at Honolulu’s pink Royal Hawaiian Hotel to rest for the next stage.

• READ MORE: A Virtual History of the Piper Cub

The runway at Wheeler was too short for the Southern Cross to take off fully loaded, so they flew to Barking Sands on the west coast of Kauai, where a special runway had been constructed. They took off from Barking Sands at 5:20 a.m. on June 3, bound for Suva in Fiji.

The journey from Hawaii to Fiji was 3,155 miles—the longest flight yet over continuous seas. It lasted 34 hours and 30 minutes at an average speed of 91.45 mph.

Halfway across near the equator, the Southern Cross encountered a tropical thunderstorm. Keep in mind, the crew did not have the benefit of an artificial horizon. The only way it could keep level, flying blind, was keeping a close eye on airspeed, altitude, and the inclinometer (or turn indicator). Somehow, the crew weathered the storm and kept going.

The crew undoubtedly felt great relief when it spotted the green landscape of Fiji ahead. There was no airport at that time, so the Southern Cross landed on a cricket field. Once again, it was far too small to use to take off again, so after a few days’ rest, the crew relocated to a beach from which to depart for the next and final leg of the journey. Leaving Fiji on June 9, the aviators embarked on their final 1,683-mile stretch home to Australia.

Once more they encountered storms, which blew them nearly 150 miles off course. Even when the weather was clear, the unrelenting and trackless ocean must have been overwhelming.

The Southern Cross reached the Australian coastline near Ballina, well south of its intended target, and turned north toward Brisbane. As the crew reached Brisbane, it was greeted by an aerial escort. The goal was Eagle Farm Airport northeast of the city—now the location of Brisbane’s main international airport.

The Southern Cross had flown 7,187 miles (11,566 kilometers) in 83 hours and 72 minutes. The Pacific Ocean had been conquered by the air for the very first time. A crowd of 26,000 greeted Smith and his crew when they touched down at Eagle Farm.

Smith died in 1935 at 35 when his airplane disappeared over the Indian Ocean while attempting to break the England-Australia speed record. His career was filled with both triumph and scandal, but he is still considered Australia’s great aviation hero. If you visit Brisbane’s airport, you can still see the real Southern Cross on display in a dedicated hangar.

The Fokker F.VII continued as a popular airliner into the 1930s. However, the vulnerability of its fabric-and-wood construction became apparent following a 1931 TWA crash that resulted in the death of famed University of Notre Dame football coach Knute Rockne. As a result, the Fokker F.VII gave way to all-metal airliners such as the Boeing 247, Lockheed L-10 Electra, and eventually the DC-3.

One of the most popular early successors to the Fokker F.VII was the Ford Trimotor, basically an all-metal version of the F.VII. For all their sponsorship, the Fords seem to have gotten something out of it in the end. Anthony Fokker, nicknamed “The Flying Dutchman,” lived most of the rest of his life in the U.S. and died at  49 in New York in 1939 from pneumococcal meningitis.  

If you’d like to see a version of this story with more historical photos and screenshots, you can check out my original post here. This story was told utilizing the “Local Legend” Fokker F.VII add-on to Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, along with liveries and scenery downloaded for free from the flightsim.to community.

The post Reaching Uncharted Corners of the Globe in a Fokker F.VII appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

My introduction to the world of aviation occurred on an afternoon in fall 1990, when I was 7 years old. I remember it clearly. My childhood best friend and I were taken to the local movie theater in Concord, New Hampshire, to see Memphis Belle. Although it was rated PG-13, my best friend’s father was our chaperone, and I believe he hoped the film would open our eyes to the seriousness of air combat. He was a U.S. Navy pilot during Vietnam, flying the Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, and served as a captain at Delta Air Lines, flying the McDonnell Douglas MD-80.

At the beginning of the film, a B-17 returning from a World War II mission makes a low pass over the Memphis Belle’s aircrew playing touch football at their base, signaling the return of the squadron. The beautiful shape and proportions of the B-17 and the unmistakable sound of those four Wright R-1820 engines thundering over me in the theater made the most indelible impression, and my love for aviation began at that very moment.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

In spring 1991, David Tallichet, the pilot/owner of N3703G, one of the B-17s flown in the film—the other was Sally B—brought it to Concord Municipal Airport (KCON), and I waited in line one rainy afternoon to tour the interior with my mother and grandfather, all three of us climbing up the steep ladder into the hatch located below the cockpit on the pilot’s side. One of my favorite early memories was pausing with my grandfather behind the pilot’s seat as he patiently answered my questions about the dizzying array of instruments, levers, and switches in the cockpit. As a boy, it looked impossibly complicated, but I was intensely fascinated.

• READ MORE: Taking a Virtual Flight with the Yawman Arrow

After the tour, I purchased a poster at the souvenir stand that Tallichet politely signed for me. At nearly 70, he was gallant in both appearance and manner and spent some extra time with my grandfather and I, taking us around the exterior of his B-17 while he and my grandfather compared notes on their flying experiences. During WWII, Tallichet was a copilot of a B-17 in the 8th Air Force, completing 20 missions. After the war, he became a successful businessman and amassed an impressive personal collection of military aircraft.

Before we departed his company, Tallichet asked if I wanted to fly when I grew up, and I automatically answered yes. Standing between him and my grandfather, who wouldn’t aspire to what each had accomplished as pilots? That poster with his autograph hung in my childhood room until I went to college.

After that close encounter with the movie Memphis Belle on the ramp, I drove my friends and family crazy by asking to rent the film at least once per month, watching it until I could recite most of the dialogue with my sister. Without YouTube in the mid-’90s, there was no easily accessible footage of what it looked like to fly a B-17 from the pilot’s seat, so I repeatedly rewound the videocassette to watch the flying sequences to try and understand how it all worked. In 1993, a friend of mine in the neighborhood heard me talking about the movie and invited me over to his house after school. He owned an early PC with a color monitor and had a copy of the recently released combat flight simulation called B-17 Flying Fortress: World War II Bombers in Action by MicroProse. This was my first flight sim experience of any kind, and I had so much fun trying to fly the B-17 that I didn’t move from the cockpit to try the other crew positions. The cockpit and the gunner stations on the bomber were faithfully modeled as much as was possible at the time. For example, in the waist gun position, you could look toward the front of the B-17 and see the wings, round engine nacelles, and propellers spinning. Your role in one of the gunner positions was to defend the Flying Fortress from attacking enemy fighter aircraft. All of this sounds rudimentary today, but the missions, crew stations, and color animation were created in the early 1990s.

Experiencing the B-17 combat simulator came at a critical and impressionable time in my childhood, and I can still remember the thrill. In speaking with many pilots I have met over the years, a lot of us had a chance to try a home flight sim that served as a connection and an on-ramp to the larger world of aviation. For me, using a flight sim was a lot of fun, and it only made me more excited to try my first real-world flight lesson when I turned 14.

Back during the late ’90s, Chris Palmer—aka @AngleofAttack and a CFI who now runs a successful general aviation training business and popular aviation YouTube channel from his home airport in Homer, Alaska—started flying the European Air War WWII combat simulator. Palmer remembers learning the basic flight and power controls and the thrill of flying a fighter aircraft over the English Channel to challenge the Germans in air-to-air combat. As a teen, he purchased Microsoft Flight Simulator X (FSX) and dreamed of becoming an airline pilot. He would load an airliner into the simulator and enjoy departing from many of the major airports around the world contained in the title’s library.

That early exposure inspired him to pursue real-world flight training. By the time he turned 17, Palmer started ground school and had already learned radio communication basics from the hours he spent on VATSIM, the live air traffic control service staffed by trained volunteer controllers that can be layered into a home flight sim with a software plug-in. After learning how to edit highlight videos for his high school football team, he built a study-level training course on how to fly the Boeing 767 on FSX. These video lessons achieved scale and, 17 years later, the DVDs, which complement a professional ground school study program, are selling to aspiring pilots training for their next upgrade.

When I came back to the world of GA to finish attaining my private pilot certificate in 2010, there was nervousness about the coming pilot shortage. Articles on the topic abounded, and writers made educated guesses about from where the next wave of pilots would come.

The question poised at that time was could enough discovery or EAA Young Eagles flights be conducted to successfully introduce the next generation to general aviation in time to stave off the looming airline pilot retirements not too many years in the future.

In 2014, I changed jobs into a marketing position where I could combine my passion for GA with my skill set as a social media marketer tasked with representing a leading general and commercial aviation product. Around this time, YouTube’s user base was rapidly expanding in popularity, and aviation enthusiasts could follow pilots on journeys from their first training lessons all the way to the airlines. Some pilots such as @flightchops (Steve Thorne) and @steveo1kinevo, who had modest followings of around 30,000 subscribers at that time, would amass hundreds of thousands of them over the next few years as their content attracted aviation enthusiasts from all over the world.

Today there are popular pilot/content creators who have used their engaging videos to help bring pilots of all ages to the airport for their first flight lessons. YouTube and the other social media channels have connected a global audience made up of millions around the world to pilot content creators with the time, equipment, and capability to publish their flying stories and share the world of GA with new, ever-widening, and more diverse global audiences through the mysterious and perplexing magic of the algorithm.

Fast-forward to this summer, and Jorg Nuemann, head of Microsoft Flight Simulator, presented to a large, in-person audience in June at FlightSimExpo, where he shared that MSFS2020 had achieved more than 12 million individual users since the software launched in September 2020. With the recent launch of X-Plane 12 in 2022, and the continued growth in popularity of Digital Combat Simulator (known as “DCS” and featuring modern fighter and rotor wing aircraft), each software program continues to attract a specific segment of digital aviation enthusiasts. Acknowledging that there is some crossover of home flight simulation pilots between these popular software titles, each offers a digital aviation experience where the user can hop over the virtual airport fence and climb into the cockpit or flight deck of so many faithfully digitally created general, commercial, and military aircraft.

Taken together, these software titles have amassed a worldwide user base on a scale not seen before. The result is YouTube and flight simulation are introducing enthusiasts to the world of aviation by serving as the top of a giant funnel, bringing the user into digital aircraft that are visually accurate to their real-world counterpart complete with high fidelity systems modeling. I believe the next generation of pilots is already here. They are fluent users in the digital world, easily finding flight simulation and aviation video content online.

Although we may not see them at real-world GA airports yet, I am already flying with them in the flight sim club of which I am a member. Listening to their radio calls approaching the Boston Class Bravo airspace, these flight sim pilots, many years my junior, are flying digital airliners into KBOS executing complex IFR arrivals with crisp and professional radio communication. Any of these flight sim pilots could show up to their first real-world discovery flight and surprise their unsuspecting CFI by being able to file and read back an IFR clearance without a single hour in the real-world logbook. Although these students will be well prepared in some aspects of flight training, they will have areas where the flight sim experience can’t adequately do so. But I’m confident a capable CFI will be able to diagnose any weaknesses and bring the student up to the relevant test standards.

To check that assumption, I asked Palmer about his thoughts on home flight-sim use and how it could potentially complement real-world flight training. As an experienced CFI who has successfully trained many private pilots, I wondered if he had any concerns about flight students crossing over from the digital world of flying into the real world—specifically the cross-country stage of private pilot training.

“If flight sim is used in the correct way, it can help you advance your flight training,” Palmer said. “There are more advantages than disadvantages. For example, you can easily mix pilotage and dead reckoning to practice navigation skills. You can plan the flight, get the

exact winds, get the exact weather, and set the correct time of day. Putting that high-fidelity tool in the hands of a student will allow them to find the airport, and [so] on their first cross-country flight, it doesn’t have to be a surprise anymore.”

Within the MSFS2020 and X-Plane 12 software, the student can explore most local airports since they are nearly all modeled. If the student pilot already has ForeFlight, they can pair their tablet with the sim and use it to find the FBO and plan the radio frequencies and approach to the airfield. Even just being able to explore the basics of ForeFlight while on your home sim can be time well spent.

“If you approach the sim seriously, and fly it to a high fidelity, it will pay you dividends by helping you feel more prepared for your private pilot flight training,” Palmer said.

In terms of behaviors to watch, Palmer cautions the new student to be ready to practice converting some of the flight sim knowledge into the real world, including getting used to the traffic scan since that is a habit not readily practiced in the sim. Simply recognizing there will be areas to relearn in actual flight training is the first step.

Equipped with their many hours of flight simulation experience, the student may already have a strong understanding of airspace, communication, navigation, and checklist use but may require some fine-tuning by their CFI.

“There’s nothing like real flying, no matter how much flight sim time you have,” Palmer said. “Go try flying a real airplane. You’re one of us. You like flying things. I am passionate about it, and I want flight sim pilots to experience real-world flight. Take a few discovery flights and see where it leads. At the very least, a real instructor can provide feedback and lesson pointers that you can bring back into the flight sim world.”

The next generation of pilots will one day share their stories about how they found aviation. In our youth, both Palmer and I supplemented our interest in aviation with early flight simulation experiences.

With the growing popularity of the home flight simulation, coupled with aviation content on YouTube and other channels, we are in the middle of a rising tide of digital flying activity that will hopefully continue to widen the funnel, bringing new people into real-world aviation, making it more accessible, and strengthening it for the future.

This feature first appeared in the November 2023/Issue 943 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Our Pilots of the Future May Share Sim Stories appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Over all the years I have been a flight simmer, I have collected a variety of hardware to get the job done. I am quite happy with my assembly of equipment, which allows me to pilot the virtual skies when the craving needs satisfying.

I am fortunate enough to go to work and play with actual flight controls connected by pulleys and cables to a bizjet worth some $20 million. Yet, this career only came after spending the first 20 years of my young adult life behind a computer, seeing the world, learning jet systems, playing the role of airline pilot, and educating myself on everything I could about what a career might be like in this exhilarating world. 

After so many years using Microsoft Flight Simulator (MSFS) 95, 98, and X, and X-Plane, I felt I had a pretty good hand on geography, airport locations around the entire U.S., and almost all of the major landmarks. Indeed, that was the case. As I started my career flying jets around the country in 2004, I definitely had that “I’ve been here before” feeling.

Starting with a good computer is key. MSFS or X-Plane won’t run well on a poorly optimized or weak machine. The good thing is prices have come way down these days, so it’s easy to find a good, solid PC to run either sim. My advice is, as always, get an intel chip base, i7 or i9, with Nvidia GeForce video. MSFS has always been the least hassle with this combination. Also required is a monitor with G-Sync technology, either on the laptop itself or externally on a home desktop system. I tried a non-G-Sync laptop by accident recently and returned it immediately due to screen tearing and artifacts, as well as stuttering in frame rates. Not all gaming machines are G-Sync, so beware and do research. The difference is night and day when using a G-Sync display.

• READ MORE: Setting Up Your Sim

Also, I am here to state (though it goes against many opinions among gamers) that a powerful laptop specifically built for gaming will run any sim phenomenally. Do not believe the naysayers. Yes, a desktop is the most powerful system to run a sim, but the compact technology in today’s top-end laptops is far superior to what it used to be. And trust me, you’ll not notice much of a difference. I like the laptops as they come ready to use, already built with the right components melded together for peak performance and quality. It’s cool high-tech wizardry.
You will never find a “gaming” computer in a Walmart, Staples, or even Best Buy. I highly recommend online purchases from dedicated retailers like, Xotic PC, Jetline Systems, or in some cities the great Micro Center. I bought mine at a local Boston Micro Center, and I love the hands-on shopping and ability to just bring it in for any issues or maintenance.

My mainstay sim gear to complement the laptop is the Thrustmaster TCA Sidestick Airbus Edition, Xbox Elite 360 controller, and Thrustmaster THQ throttle quadrant. All are easily portable and high quality. Our friends at Sporty’s Pilot Shop offer a bundle of these. The Xbox Elite unit can be purchased at most stores and is exceptionally great for programming the autopilot functions that I use. MSFS seems to accommodate an unlimited number of plug-in USB devices, and this inexpensive unit is one I highly recommend.

Twenty years ago, we had flight yokes, rudder pedals, and more. Yet they were quite heavy and extremely expensive. The market is wide open now with many brands to choose from, satisfying everyone from the casual simmer to the home cockpit builder. Military enthusiasts get what they’re looking for as well, with extremely realistic side sticks replicating exact fighter jet models.

Even though I love my portable on-the-road sim setup, when sitting at home, feeling the throttle quadrant in my right hand with the yoke in my left, feet in place, I can forget that this is all simulated. The realism is really heightened when using a 747 and swapping out the normal two-engine jet for the quad jet pieces that come standard with the Honeycomb base throttle unit. Now, manipulating four individual throttles really comes to life. You feel like you’re in command of something big.

A 747 or Piper Cub, it’s all available when using a Honeycomb THQ. The combinations are limitless and the quality is great. It offers precision handling, and all the parts and pieces can be popped off and on easily to turn it into anything you want. Then you just assign each slider to something in the MSFS controllers configuration screens.

The default throttle parts for Honeycomb are great and work the best overall. Recently, a new company called Prodesksim has started making add-on enhancements for the existing Honeycomb throttle quadrant. ProDeskSim attachments  add visual realism, true-size parts, and functionality. However, one issue I discovered is that the overlays, or underlays, of the throttle and speedbrake strips keep popping out of place as they don’t sit tightly enough to withstand the speedbrake or flap levers moving in and out of place.

Each time I use either the flaps or speedbrake axis, the plastic inserts all pop out from the detents being used. You can use the items without the flap tracks certainly, but you lose immersion and the actual detents most of the units use.

To remedy the loose underlay parts, you have to be very careful or kind of hold them in place with an available finger before using the axis. If you’re a cockpit modeler simulating just one type of jet, you could glue these into place, but it would be permanent. 

I have since learned that ProDeskSim has implemented a fix for all future units to keep this issue from occurring (my demo units came out early in 2023). The innovation here is great. I love how the company can make so many options and attachments based on the default unit. You can turn your Honeycomb unit pretty much into any GA or jet aircraft you want, making the possibilities seem endless.

I’m honestly not fond of reassembling each time as I change aircraft often enough to where this would be a big setback. For a cockpit modeler of one particular jetliner, this isn’t an issue. I found myself using the Boeing twin jetliner units the most as they are fantastic and only take seconds to install.

In case you’ve never used rudder pedals, it’s definitely one of those experiences where you don’t know what you’re missing until you try it. Once you set your feet snugly on them, you’ll wonder how you survived without for so long. I can’t bring them in my suitcase or I probably would.

Getting all the right hardware in place is the first step to enjoying your sims. You certainly don’t have to spend a fortune since the basic Airbus stick-and-throttle unit combined is only $199. The quality is precise and solid. There are online folks who have showcased using real aircraft cockpits and even airliners from nose through first-class cabins to run their sims. I can only dream of that for now.

The post All the Right Tools for Setting Up a Flight Sim appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 (MSFS2020), I’ll be flying the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter, a Cold War airplane with a checkered history that demonstrated that speed isn’t everything.

To kick us off, I’m at Edwards Air Force Base in California’s Mojave Desert, with a reincarnation of the same plane that Chuck Yeager crashed trying to set a new altitude record here in 1963.

The story of the F-104 begins in the skies over Korea, where U.S. pilots in F-86 Sabres battled MiG-15s, many of them secretly flown by Russian pilots. While the F-86 held its own, pilots reported that they wanted a jet fighter that could fly faster and higher than the MiG. The challenge was taken up by Kelly Johnson, the famous head of Lockheed’s Skunk Works, who designed many of the company’s most groundbreaking planes, including the L-10 Electra and P-38 Lighting, and later the U-2 and SR-71 Blackbird spy planes.

The F-104 Starfighter would be propelled by a single General Electric J79 jet engine, an absolute monster that produced over 14,000 pounds of thrust. The main wings of the F-104 were stubby, extremely thin, and tilted downward (anhedral) as a counter to the T-tail behind. The forward edges of the wings were so sharp they created a safety hazard to ground crew—accidentally bang into them, and they could cut like a knife.

When flying at high angles of attack, the wings could potentially mask the T-tail from the airflow, rendering the elevators useless and making it impossible to pitch down to recover—something I learned I really had to watch out for.

The cockpit is all analog gauges. The most important are the artificial horizon to the middle right, the altimeter to the middle left, and the airspeed indicator just above it. The engine gauges to the far right are important too, because this thing is easy to overheat.

The throttle to the left is pretty simple. Just next to it is the level for flaps. There’s only one stage of flaps, about 10 degrees, for takeoff and landing.

The first F-104 prototype took to the skies in March 1954 at Edwards AFB and quickly earned its reputation as a “missile with a man on it.” In the first few months, the F-104 set numerous altitude and speed records, becoming the first jet fighter to exceed Mach 2.

But it also soon revealed a number of flaws and limitations that would plague it throughout its career. First, while it was extremely fast, it had a very wide turning radius, which made it unsuitable for close-in dogfighting. This became evident when I made a 180-degree turn to land and kept way overshooting the runway.

Second, when you have the engine on full throttle, it’s very easy for the compressor to stall and cause the engine to flame out. This happened several times, throwing me violently forward in the cockpit. I was high enough, so I could restart.

Finally, there’s angle of attack, the angle at which the wing meets the air. The higher that angle, the more lift. But beyond a certain point the wing will stall and cease providing any lift at all. The angle of attack indicator is the dial to the far right. It’s on “3” here. When it goes to “5” or more, the stick starts shaking to warn me. And if it goes into the red, the stick will automatically push forward, causing the airplane to lurch nose down.

At first, I found it a challenge to manage the angle of attack at speeds below 200 knots. In fact, that’s why the F-104 was known for having to land at a relatively fast speed. In fact, this was the result of my first attempt to land it. Needless to say, it was a closed-casket funeral.

For all these reasons, the F-104 was one of the first jet fighters to feature an ejection seat. Pull the cord down between my legs and away we go. F-104 pilots wore spurs, which clipped into wires that, when they ejected, pulled their legs in from the rudder pedals so they wouldn’t get ripped off. The pilots loved these because when they walked around it made them look and feel like cowboys.

The problem was the first explosive charges for the F-104’s ejection seat couldn’t propel the pilot above the oncoming T-tail. So the pilot was ejected downward out the bottom of the fuselage. Ejecting downward at high altitudes wasn’t a problem, but it became deadly at low altitudes on final approach. The ejection would slam you right into the ground before the parachute could open. Eventually this was changed, and new explosive charges were rigged to blow off the canopy and eject the pilot skyward, which has remained the practice ever since.

The F-104 is probably most familiar from the scene in the 1983 film The Right Stuff, where Yeager, played by Sam Shepard, tries to fly one to the edge of space and ends up losing control and ejecting just before it crashes. This was a real event, and the airplane he flew (NF-756) was actually an experimental version of the F-104 with a rocket (not depicted) attached to the tail, providing an additional boost to reach maximum altitude.

Yeager actually began his run level at 40,000 feet to build up speed to Mach 2.2 before starting his climb. Then he nosed up 45 degrees or more and shot for the sky. At 78,000 feet he shut off the main engine and let the tail rocket propel him higher. 

In the movie, it makes it look like the problem was that his engine failed. In fact, that wasn’t the issue. The trouble was that around 107,000 feet for some reason the elevators became locked, and he couldn’t nose down as he lost speed. Unable to regain speed by nosing back down, the airplane went into a flat spin, and Yeager ultimately had to eject. The seat hit him and caused the rubber in his helmet to catch fire, burning his face and one of his fingers badly, but he survived.

I don’t have an extra tail rocket and was still learning the ropes with the finicky engine, so the highest I was able to go in the F-104 was to about 50,000 feet. The view was pretty wild, though. The fastest I could get the F-104 on my first flight was Mach 1.4. Though I think with a little practice I could probably figure out how to get past Mach 2.

Time to come back down to earth and try to land right this time. Barreling in at 200 knots is a little unnerving (a Cessna lands at about 60 knots, a Boeing 737 at about 130). Once you do touch down, the F-104 has a parachute you can deploy to help slow you down in time before you run out of runway. Later versions of the F-104 also featured a tailhook that could catch wires on certain airfields to come to a halt. Either way, even in the sim you definitely feel being slammed forward as you decelerate.

The F-104 was initially deployed as a high-speed interceptor and played a key deterrent role in the 1958 Taiwan Straits Crisis, the 1961 Berlin Wall Crisis, and the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. But the limitations of the F-104 in an actual combat role became evident during the Vietnam War, which is why I’m at the giant U.S. airbase at Da Nang (now a civilian airport, VVDN).

One big drawback was limited range. The F-104 guzzled fuel and would quickly run out if it didn’t carry an array of extra tanks on its wings to supplement. The jet was designed to intercept and shoot down other fighters. But there were few enemy fighters that posed a direct threat in the skies over Vietnam. As a result, the F-104 scored zero direct air-to-air kills in almost 3,000 sorties during the Vietnam War, though several were lost due to accidents and enemy fire (one was reported shot down by a Chinese fighter jet after straying into China airspace).

It can be argued that F-104 Starfighters performed their job well. By patrolling the skies, they deterred North Vietnamese fighter jets, which largely avoided them, ensuring the safety of other U.S. aircraft involved in providing close-air support to troops fighting on the ground. Nevertheless, the F-104 was soon phased out of the U.S. Air Force, replaced by other jets such as the F-4 Phantom which, while not as fast, could serve in a more versatile range of roles, from dogfighting to bombing to landing on aircraft carriers.

That was hardly the end of the F-104, however. Just as its life with the Air Force was ending, it gained popularity in export markets, including the American-recognized Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan. On January 13, 1967, four Republic of China Air Force Starfighters engaged a formation of People’s Liberation Army Air Force MiG-19s  over the island of Kinmen (Quemoy) just off the coast of mainland China. One F-104 did not return to base and was presumably shot down. But two Taiwanese pilots each shot down a MiG-19.

Johnson said this aerial battle illustrated both the strengths and weaknesses of the fighter he designed for Lockheed. It had the advantage in speed and altitude but could not turn with the MiGs. This particular airplane (4344) survived and remains on display at the ROC Air Force Museum in Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

Several other countries also adopted the F-104 in the mid-1960s. One of the most important was Canada, which acquired a license from Lockheed to produce it domestically as the CF-104. This CF-104 being refueled belongs to the 3rd Fighter Wing once based at Zweibrücken in southwest Germany.

At the time, Canada actually had the fourth-largest air force in the world, with four bases in Western Europe, two in France, and two (including Zweibrücken) in what was then West Germany. The Canadian CF-104s at all four bases replaced F-86 Sabres and took on two special missions, with the first being aerial reconnaissance.

The second mission— a unique one—was a nuclear strike. The Canadian CF-104s carried a single, compact nuclear bomb under its fuselage, like a drop-tank, which unfortunately I’m not able to depict. In wartime, the job of the Canadian CF-104s was to take off and fly straight to targets inside the former Soviet Union and drop their nuclear load.

Even with wingtip fuel tanks, the CF-104s didn’t have the range to fly to Russia and back. The pilot would be expected to bail out somewhere near the target and hide until the war ended. That’s a pretty rough assignment. I’m glad I’m not that guy and that this guy never actually had to perform his mission. Canada operated the CF-104 for 25 years from 1962-1987, when it was replaced by the F-18 Hornet.

Like many other countries that flew the Starfighter, Canada saw a very high accident rate—110 major accidents and 37 fatalities—which gained it the nickname “The Widow Maker.” But the country that ordered the largest number of export F-104s, and had the highest accident rate, was West Germany.

The Starfighter we’re looking at is a little different. It’s a two-seat TF-104 used as a trainer. When countries deployed the F-104, they typically bought a few TF-104s as part of the package. This TF-104 belongs to JaboG 34, a fighter-bomber squadron once based at Memmingerberg in Bavaria and now a civilian airport.

Starting in 1960, the Germans bought 915 Starfighters, 35 percent of all F-104s ever produced, as part of a plan to quickly ramp up their contribution to NATO’s fighting force. Of these 915 planes, 292 (almost one-third) were destroyed in accidents and 116 pilots were killed. At one point, there was an accident happening almost every week.

This was the worst safety record of any country operating the F-104. Why was it so bad? There are several reasons that probably contributed. First, many pilots in the new Luftwaffe were inexperienced, with only a few older veterans signing on who had flown in World War II. Many of the F-104 problems persisted: engines flaming out, stalling at high speeds, T-tail elevators becoming ineffective, etc. Even at its best, the Starfighter was considered an unforgiving aircraft. In the hands of an inexperienced pilot, this could be deadly.

Second, to save money, the Germans made the F-104 their one and only type of airplane. Originally designed as a high-altitude interceptor, they had it play a wide variety of roles, including low-altitude combat support bomber. This role led to many accidents where pilots couldn’t pull up fast enough from a dive and crashed.

Third, many German pilots received their F-104 training in the American Southwest, where the weather was clear and ideal. When they came back to Europe, they found themselves operating in poor weather conditions close to the ground. Many accidents were weather related.

Finally, there’s that ejector seat. Many German pilots trained on F-104s with a downward ejecting seat. They learned to adapt at low altitude by turning the airplane upside down before ejecting, so they would be propelled away from the ground. By the time the Germans received their planes, though, many had been changed to upward ejecting seats. But by force of habit, some pilots would still turn upside down before ejecting at low altitude and…well, you know.

If this ongoing bloodbath wasn’t enough, West Germany’s F-104 purchases became the center of a major bribery scandal. In the 1970s, several German politicians, including the defense minister, were accused of taking multimillion-dollar bribes from Lockheed to choose the F-104 over its rivals. Similar charges were made against Lockheed in other countries, involving the F-104 and other aircraft.

For all its flaws, the West German Luftwaffe continued to rely on the F-104 as its primary warbird until it was replaced by the Panavia Tornado in the 1980s. British pilot Eric Brown said the F-104 was an airplane that “has to be flown every inch of the way.” The U.S. required pilots to have 1,500 flight hours before climbing into the F-104. German pilots typically had 400—and it showed.

Now if all of this makes you want to jump into a F-104 and try it out, you may be in luck. An outfit called Starfighters Inc. offers a two-day program of flight training in one out of Kennedy Space Center in Florida for $29,900. Its small fleet of former Canadian TF-104s operates out of a hangar at the space shuttle landing facility. If you have that kind of money lying around, all you need is a private pilot certificate, medical certificate, be within certain maximum height and weight limits, and be able to pass a security check to get on-site.

For what you’re paying, I certainly hope they let you go Mach 2. I don’t have that kind of coin, but at least in the sim I can fly over Kennedy Space Center and wave hello to Elon Musk. So, yeah, your dreams can come true and it can happen to you—if money is no object. In the meantime, the rest of us will have to make do with Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020.

I hope you’ve enjoyed this feature on the F-104 Starfighter and its interesting history. And maybe at least one of you will go to Florida and fly one. Good luck!

If you’d like to see a version of this article with more historical photos and screenshots, you can check out my original post here.

This story was told utilizing the Sim Skunk Works TF-104G and FRF-104G add-ons to Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, along with liveries and sceneries produced by fellow users and shared on flightsim.to for free.

The post Exploring the Checkered History of the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

In the depths of the first year of COVID-19 in September 2020, having been at home for six months straight, I, like many aviators who had been estranged from our local airports, felt the overwhelming desire to reconnect to aviation.

Having been a flight sim enthusiast in the decade before, but inactive since Microsoft Flight Simulator X and X-Plane 9, I decided to launch into building my own home flight simulator with the goal of pairing it with the freshly launched Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 (MSFS2020). My goal was to create a cockpit that featured the avionics equipment that I wanted to learn when I could eventually go back to flying in real life, and I wanted my simulator to replicate all the switches and buttons found in most GA aircraft. After three years of building and customizing, my flight simulator reflects the missions and aircraft I like to fly while also allowing the practice of basic maneuvers and procedures at home. 

When the opportunity came to review the Yawman Arrow, I was apprehensive about an all-in-one hand controller designed for a mobile or minimalist home flight sim setup that seemed a world away from the cockpit I had purposefully built. 

The Yawman Arrow team took on the audacious challenge of condensing all of the major flight controls that flight sim pilots have in their home cockpits down into a single hand-held controller. It features two Vernier-style sliders on the bottom center. On the bottom left of the controller is a trim wheel. All the way to the right side are two conventional throttle sliders. Above them is the “six-pack” of black buttons. On the top left of the face is a thumb stick used for the yoke. Directly below and in the center-left position is a five-button switch, and a multidirectional hat switch sits in the center-right position, directly below the six-pack of buttons. At the very top of the controller is the most novel component of the Yawman Arrow—two rudder controls operated by each of your index fingers that are linked together like the rudder controls of a real airplane. When you depress one side, the other side moves in the equal and opposite direction. Two additional buttons near the rudder controls can be assigned to various tasks like the parking brake or for changing Yawman Arrow menus so that more than one function can be paired to a single button. 

While plugging in the controller and jumping into a quick flight is possible, I recommend spending time getting acquainted with the controller’s default button assignments. The Yawman Arrow website has pre-built these so you can print them out, or you can keep them on a second screen as a helpful reference for your first flight. Note that it is best to double-check the button assignments in the control options menu in MSFS2020 (and the equivalent location in X-Plane 11 or 12). I found that some default control assignments differed from the printable document available on the Yawman website. 

To effectively fly with the Yawman Arrow, I needed to spend time sitting in my home flight sim cockpit seat, looking at my controls and then making a plan to determine what assignment to give the most important buttons and sliders. Sitting in my cockpit allowed me to make a visual inventory of the controls, assign them, and then verify the assignments in the MSFS2020 control options menu to make sure I completed the process correctly. It went quickly once I had determined what controls I wanted to assign to the Yawman Arrow. I kept as many of the default settings as I could, only editing what I needed. 

• READ MORE: Setting Up Your Sim

For my first flight, I loaded into the Cessna 172 at KPWM and planned for some basic maneuvers out over the waters of Casco Bay, east of the Portland International Jetport in Maine. I used standard weather and light winds to minimize external factors influencing the aircraft. Preflight and taxiing were no problem once I set the necessary buttons for wheel brakes, parking brake, and flaps. Taxiing using the rudders was enjoyable. The linked rudder controls were my favorite feature of the Yawman Arrow. As a habit, I squeezed both rudder controls at the same time to bring the airplane to a stop near the end of the taxiway before remembering that I needed to use the braking button I had previously mapped. 

Takeoff proved to be more challenging than I anticipated. As I am used to using a realistic, full-size VirtualFly yoke, I needed to acclimate to the relatively small control deflection offered by the thumb stick of the Yawman Arrow. Add to that the effects of P-factor on the aircraft when under full power during takeoff, and my fingers were dancing between the action of rolling the trim wheel, pulling back the yoke hat switch and moving the rudder controls. It was an exercise in small movement motor control, which didn’t take long to get used to. In subsequent takeoffs, I spent time dialing in the yoke/hat switch control sensitivity settings and keeping an eye on my Air Manager display to double-check how much trim control I was using. I was challenged to find the control harmony on takeoff and believe there is more work to be done between dialing in the default sensitivities “out-of-the-box” in MSFS2020 on the Yawman Arrow and simply spending more time getting used to the way aircraft must be flown using the controller.  

Once airborne over the practice area, the 172 was stable, and I found the control harmony between the yoke and rudder controls on the Yawman Arrow was sufficient for slow flight and recovering from power-on and power-off stalls. Satisfied after completing a few basic maneuvers, I returned to the airport to practice a visual approach to a full-stop landing. I set up for a 5-mile, straight-in approach to Runway 29, having flown it before as an active private pilot in real life. I enjoy coming in over the waterways surrounding the city of Portland and MSFS2020 provides some great visual landmarks. 

On a 2-mile final, I set the power for the remainder of the descent and focused on fine-tuning the pitch using the trim wheel. Backing up my trim inputs again visually using the trim display instrument on Air Manager definitely helped. Setting the trim is a critical ingredient of a stabilized approach, and being able to do this consistently is key to making the Yawman Arrow an enjoyable companion or primary controller. The landing was satisfactory, and I felt that I had adequate control authority. Landing provided a good place to try the controller, as it combines relatively slow air speeds with a need to have your fingers near the trim wheel, on the yoke, on the throttle, and up at the rudder controls. This is easier than it sounds given the controller’s natural position in the hand and the thoughtful location of the aforementioned controls. It made me curious to see what a larger version of the Yawman Arrow would feel like, with just a bit more room for hat switch, trim wheel, sliders, and buttons. 

Yawman Arrow founder Jon Ostrower and I discussed the trim wheel in one of our exchanges, and he recommended using it when flying most GA aircraft but to then map the electric trim controls to the second hat switch if flying an aircraft that primarily uses electric trim controls—such as a Cirrus or any small, medium, or large jet—to better simulate how those controls would be moved in the real aircraft. It didn’t occur to me that the trim wheel could be set as a dial for other control uses, such as changing the settings of the autopilot or tuning radio frequencies. It was a reminder that the Yawman Arrow can be set to control nearly any function you need. Other buttons can serve as menu buttons that can be held so that the same button can have more than one function. Here’s where spending time with the default button layouts from the Yawman Arrow website and manual, watching a few how-to videos for tips, and really working through your own customized setup will pay dividends in terms of finding the correct controls at your fingertips when you need it. 

Since I mainly fly GA aircraft in my flight simulation adventures, I loaded up a few of the landing challenges in MSFS2020 that didn’t feature strong crosswinds, so I could better acquaint myself with the Yawman Arrow as a primary controller for jet aircraft. The Aspen, Colorado, and Jackson Hole, Wyoming, landing challenges are favorites of mine and served as good test flight profiles as controlling airspeed is the primary objective once the aircraft is lined up correctly on short final. If flying jets will be your primary use for the Yawman, be sure to set controls for the landing gear, speed brakes, flaps, thrust reversers, and other key controls that you’ll need to execute your landings.

Final Impressions  

Overall, I believe the Yawman Arrow controller is a good value for the cost—especially if you’re the type of user who must have a minimalist cockpit setup based on your budget, or you’re someone who travels a lot and desires a portable sim solution. Like any new flight sim equipment, I continued becoming more comfortable as I flew with it, even though I wish I had spent a bit more time with button assignments. I never managed to get the takeoff behavior harmonized to my liking, but I recognize that we’re still in the early days of the Yawman Arrow, and I know that the team behind its development and the flight sim community will begin sharing their collective knowledge to help tune the sensitivity of the yoke and trim settings and make it a bit more intuitive right out of the box in MSFS2020. Note that I limited my testing to MSFS2020 as I currently don’t use X-Plane 11 or 12, so controller sensitivity and differences in the aircraft’s flight model behavior can vary widely between both flight sim software titles. 

Although this is just a nitpick, I would have preferred a grippier outer surface and potentially a larger form factor, like an “XL” size. Given Ostrower’s deliberate design choices, I am sure these factors were given considerable weight, and they amount to subjective personal impressions of my time flying with the Yawman Arrow. Also, I suspect that the controller would pair well with popular head tracking units, such as TrackIR or Tobii Eye Tracker, which would allow those small glances around the cockpit to check the trim and flaps settings. Using them compliments a minimalist setup and would increase immersion. I relied on my copy of Air Manager running on an adjacent screen to help me verify my trim wheel inputs. 

Although the Yawman Arrow won’t be my primary controller, it does offer even the most hardware-obsessed among us the chance to break it out for quick, casual sightseeing flights. It also provides a chance to use your flight simulator while you’re traveling and  to do more intense jet flying with it if you’re committed to learning the control bindings. It is priced at $199.99 and available at Sporty’s Pilot Shop. That price is $79 below that of a Honeycomb Alpha yoke and about in the middle of the cost range of popular joystick HOTAS options. 

Default settings for Yawman Arrow can be found here. 

Pros:

• Best feature is connected rudder controls.
• The Trim wheel is  a novel addition to the hand controller. 
• There are two options for throttles (vernier style or slider).
• Basic camera movement and autopilot controls worked effectively.

Cons: 

• Since there is no wireless function, it must be plugged into your PC or laptop.
• Yawman Arrow does not work with Xbox. 
• A grippier outer material and potentially larger form factor would be preferable.

The post Taking a Virtual Flight with the Yawman Arrow appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

With exactly three years since the “new” Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 was released, me, along with many thousands of die-hard flight simmers have been taken by storm, fallen in love, gotten angry, or experienced a multitude of emotions.

Competition is good, and before 2020, we all began to think Microsoft was out of the game, and X-Plane creator Austin Meyer would be the savior, keeping this hobby alive forever. Certainly not swayed by Microsoft’s offerings, Meyer and his team forged ahead, putting the finishing touches on X-Plane 11. X-Plane 12 was released earlier this year after a long beta period. Not forgotten here, or elsewhere, the X-Plane series is continuously updated and developed. In fact, Meyer’s team at Laminar Research is the largest it’s ever been—tiresomely working on X-Plane 12.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

I won’t hide the fact that MSFS2020 is gorgeous to look at and has the most stunning aircraft to visually drool over. Photorealistic qualities abound both in the cockpit and view outside. Worldwide satellite imagery turned 3D being fed to you as you fly makes for the most gorgeous earthly renditions I have ever witnessed on a PC. There’s worldwide live weather, even clouds that look real as they are fed via satellite imagery at high resolutions and a fast frame rate. But this can be detrimental to some that lack high-speed connectivity.

Offline play is also nonexistent. The MSFS world will only load well if you’re on a super internet connection. Otherwise, it will struggle and run too poorly to enjoy. Many of the installation issues or updating problems users experience is because of the lack of quality internet connectivity in other parts of the world. With X-Plane, you can still fly offline, anywhere, anytime, hassle free.

But I want to get into detail on one thing. The flight quality in MSFS—although improved since its release—still feels somewhat “too easy, or rail-y.” The development team has openly discussed how new programming of wind on terrain, weather, active thermals, and lift/drag all have improved flight models, and, yes, you can certainly feel the improvements over previous versions. But still something is missing, at least on some default flight models. The lack of momentum, lift being produced on individual surfaces, weight, and weather conditions at hand don’t touch the “blade element theory” X-Plane has rallied with since the beginning.

A Different Model

The realism of the flight model and the pure feel of flying any machine in XP12 is just pure joy. If you have high quality hardware, it’s even more noticeable. As I write this, I am flying a 747-200 with the masterful Honeycomb yoke and a throttle quadrant supporting up to four engines. (Sporty’s Pilot Shop is the place to go for the starter set and run it on a Doghouse Systems Flying Edition core).

I have fallen in love with the Felis 747-200 classic add-on, available for purchase from the x-plane.org online store. This to me is the absolute greatest example of top-end flight dynamics quality, resulting from the XP12 programming. Flying the greatest airliner of all time and being able to feel every aspect is what I love.

You can really feel the momentum to get moving and power required to break away on the tarmac. The sway, moving on body gear steering, is all there all while monitoring your brake temperatures from the flight engineer’s position. The entire cockpit is modeled with every system and switch performing some function with consequences.

I am not a 747 pilot nor engineer, so I really need to spend a lot of time studying all this from profiled documentation or many resources available on the internet. It is a dream to just “do patterns” in this beast—at light weights, pretty agile yet rock solid.

Flying the Felis ‘742’

When considering the Felis “742” in XP12, the lighting, sky, and weather depiction is improved, but jagged shadows and somewhat grainy textures still exist around the cockpit at times. The Felis 742 has an EFB that will calculate the necessary speeds, with corresponding flap settings, takeoff power, etc. This beast will react to weight extremely realistically, and you’ll feel it while hand flying.

The takeoff is the most realistically pleasing of any flight sim aircraft I have ever used in 40 or more years as a simmer. Partially because of XP12 itself and its brilliant modeling, and partially because of this particular aircraft add-on’s quality. As you go barreling down the runway, (don’t forget XPrealistic for the shaking and sounds not included in XP12 by default) the rattling and vibrations come to life. At V_R, you pull hard on the yoke and wait. Nothing happens right away then slowly the “Queen of the Skies” will relinquish her grip on Earth, bringing the nose up to takeoff attitude, and moments later the main trucks will unplant themselves and she’ll break ground. You can feel this with your eyes, and vertical speed, and even with your controls. It’s absolutely amazing—with wings bending and lifting, external flyby views are the best at these moments.

Magnificent in every way, the 747-200 for XP11 and XP12 demonstrates dominating realism—it could be the best rendition of any heavy jet for any flight sim. In cruise you’ll be constantly fiddling with the four power levers to tweak precise fuel flow just like the real 747-200. Holding four levers in your hand with real hardware ups the immersion 10 times, or cheat and use the primitive autothrottle. I will have to wait until the PMDG Simulations team releases its 747-400 series, sometime in the next year I believe, to see if it can outdo this model with the MSFS base. PMDG is the master of flight dynamics for the Microsoft franchise, featuring the 737NG, 747-400, and 777 previous version. But until then, the Felis 742 can not be touched.

Improving X-Plane

The current state of X-Plane 12 is under constant improvement. The folks at Laminar Research are working on some internal graphics enhancements to mesh with all the extra VRAM optimizations currently undergoing to bring XP12 to the next level. I’ve been told that the problems I have experienced with jagged edges, or blocky shadows, etc., will be drastically improved, but it all takes time. It’s a puzzle of memory allocation and individual pixel related algorithms.

Meyer’s efforts are to continually produce the most realistically accurate flight simulator in the world, not a scenery sim or one that showcases your home and driveway below. As we know, those things are in “the other sim.” For now, I have also been enjoying the proven XP11 with the Felis 747 and other top quality add-ons I have purchased over the years. They all perform flawlessly in XP11, from the standpoint of flight dynamics, in a world that is still tried and true. I have no doubt XP12 will dominate everyone’s XP world in the upcoming year or so, sending XP11 to the closet.

What XP12 now offers is a completely new scenery base model, with greater variability of the “plausible world.” The biggest overhaul was with ambient lighting, weather modeling, and effects such as standing water, puddling, spray, and ground icing and its effects on the aircraft at hand. The weather is so cool that I have often placed myself on a ramp, engine off, in silence to hear and watch an incoming squall line blast me.

To take a flight sim aircraft model and place yourself in an area on the ramp in silence, with no engines running, to watch and listen to the weather inbound is a testament to its realism. The roar of thunder, wind, pouring rain, and lightning flashes are the best I have seen. The same with icing, snow squalls and slippery runways, where water will freeze up on you—either all manually driven or via live weather. The XP thunderstorm model will destroy you if you choose to tangle. The MSFS thunderstorm may look good but is weak in comparison. There’s a feeling of danger in XP when it comes to the weather.

Weather Realism

Using live weather will dynamically change as you fly the globe. It’s accurate, fast loading, and works well on a weak internet connection. But a fun exercise is to build the weather manually. X-Plane doesn’t interpret METAR visibility well in automatic weather, limiting it to only 10 miles by default since that’s the upper limit on worldwide METAR reports. This is very annoying, as in-flight visibilities often go far above 100 miles. The XP world always looks too hazy. By taking auto weather off, and manually controlling it, you can enjoy all the preloaded winds aloft, etc., and then raise the visibility to something more fitting.

• READ MORE: Testing Live Weather and Winter Wonders Along the Way

Manually building more believable cumulus clouds and thunderstorms is great. For those of you who don’t like the automatically made clouds, try making a scattered layer of cumulonimbus with no rain, no change, and steady state. You’ll get some very believable puffy clouds on an otherwise nice day. Be sure to manually add thermals below the bases as well for typical daytime chop. Then make the clouds deteriorate on their own for the next level of greatness with the thunderstorms XP so perfectly demonstrates.

The X-Plane pucker factor wouldn’t be what it is without the ability to set up more than 500 combinations of system failures anytime, anywhere. This powerful tool is another feature that has made XP so incredibly real for flight training, awareness, and other real-life “big picture” skills that home simulators can perfect. From bird strikes and the resulting random damage to faulty maintenance that could lead to an aileron coming off sometime unexpectedly, it’s all there. Not for the faint of heart, yet absolutely necessary for one’s skills and processing strengths as a sim or real-world pilot.

The add-on market of available fully detailed systems for loaded aircraft is strong. Operating them in the X-Plane world (either version) gives the desktop pilot the best feel for what that particular real-life aircraft counterpart flies like.

This feature first appeared in the October 2023/Issue 942 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Ultimate Realism ‘X-posed’ in 747-200 Classic appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

With winter gripping most of the country, it’s one of my most favorite times to sim fly. Actually, that’s a lie. All seasons are fun. However, winter does hold that special, adventurous spirit the other seasons sometimes seem to lack. 

I am often inspired by the real locations and weather I experience when I am on a real work trip. With ForeFlight by my side, it’s fun to test the realism of the sims and how they’re interpreting live weather worldwide. Both X-Plane 12 (XP12) and Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 (MSFS2020) do a pretty good job of keeping up with it and both have shown continual improvements. It seems each month the message forums are showcasing live weather questions, observations, frustrations, and praise. 

I feel the most accurate live weather award currently goes to MSFS2020 as most of the flights I take, with ForeFlight next to me, are startlingly accurate. The altimeter, visibility, and clouds are really spot on. Locations of rain or snow are pretty accurate too with virga and visual depictions often having me saying “wow.” 

I made my way westward recently from the East Coast to encounter winter spots. The first was a stop into Cleveland Hopkins International Airport (KCLE) using a 787 Dreamliner. KCLE is known for lake-effect snow and this day didn’t disappoint. Snow bands were flowing west to east, and my flight session, down the ILS to an eventual autoland, took me right in the heart of it all.

Various moments from the cockpit view included bursts of snow whooshing past, some varying visibility, and not a lot of turbulence. Even as shown on ForeFlight, the snow showers ended east of the field near the city, allowing for an almost completely visual approach. As I got closer, some definite wind shear jibs and jabs made the wings bounce, something the 787 is famous for with its dampening, flexing wings.

Testing live weather was a success in this scenario. Let’s see the next one. 

I proceeded westward a few hours to the Dakotas and upon reaching there had some very windy weather and snowy bursts to contend with as well. I was using the amazing Learjet 35 I recently featured and it was a blast to feel this one out in surface winds gusting to 40 knots. The Learjet has enough fuel for about 1,500 nm tops, and in this case I traveled about 1,000 miles. I set out for a field in the North Dakota-eastern Montana area for fuel and aircraft change.

The somewhat higher elevations and wide-open areas with some gradual terrain will start making shear. The bumps were noticeable but not yet overly crazy. The wind flow over terrain effect within MSFS is remarkably accurate. 

For the next leg of the adventure, I chose the default Cessna Longitude bizjet, with more range and modern avionics to attempt a “visual” in horrendous weather, surrounded by dangerous terrain. Revelstoke, British Columbia, in Canada is spectacular as it gets, so I went to go check it out.

I vectored myself onto the arrival below the terrain. I would be landing on Runway 30 with the poor weather conditions, so I decided to use the modern technology at hand.

Following the 3D view with an eyesight-enhanced vision system on the Latitude, I could see right through the clouds and snow, down the river in virtual visual conditions. Now, I don’t think pilots with this avionics package do this yet, but I could see someday in the not too distant future the ability to just fly a visual approach in something horrendous.

I was led right down the shoot to the breakout point and runway in real visual conditions at a low altitude I would say was near ILS minimums.

In the real Challenger 300 I fly, similar to the Longitude, the reversers are so effective and rev up to such a high percentage, we don’t even touch the brakes until almost walking speed or something under 40 knots.

MSFS has great icing modeled with effects on performance. It doesn’t always come off cleanly, and sometimes even windows don’t get cleared very rapidly.

Continuing the adventure, I got into an A321neo (LatinVFR available on sim marketplace) for the rest of the journey westward. There is no better, more scenic place than Juneau, Alaska, and an unusual weather event was occurring at the time—clear skies! Alaska in winter is usually terrible with huge rain storms likely along the coast or wet snow blizzards. Apparently a cold snap following some heavy snows was occurring the day I tried this, and the built-in live weather matched the conditions almost to a T.

I have to stop somewhere, because the adventuring available in Alaska is endless. Maybe I’ll do this  again later this winter as there is so much to discover and tinker with. Setting up manual weather to something wild and dangerous is also fun, especially in mountainous regions. Using the variety of GA aircraft available in the sims opens up a whole new avenue of bush flying, where icing dangers are more noteworthy. 

As always, I have to link the “must-haves” as you fly: 

FS Realistic Pro for the best add-on ever made.

Sporty’s Pilot Shop for all the flight controls imaginable and an easy home setup.

ProDeskSim for the coolest affordable add-ons to the Honeycomb throttle quadrant that will leave you drooling. 

The post Testing Live Weather and Winter Wonders Along the Way appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

2023 was certainly a great year for us flight simmers. I will often showcase favorite aircraft and add-ons as they arise, and some products that were introduced in 2021-22 still remain strong and the best in their class. Just like Oprah Winfrey, I too have my list of favorite things to share. They won’t make me famous, nor do the authors of all these become an overnight sensation and instant millionaires like Oprah’s following dictates, but nonetheless my list is solid in my own mind.

1. Learjet 35A by FlySimWare

I think my favorite thing of 2023 was the sudden release of the FlySimWare Lear 35A. This is a humdinger of a masterpiece even if it’s still at the “early access” stage. I can’t recall another aircraft that has been so great right out of the box, with so little wait time or hoopla. I mean, we have the greats such as PMDG and Fenix, but they don’t get dropped suddenly without any long waits. 

The Lear 35A is a fabulous addition to the bizjet genre and one that will be continually upgraded. I have not flown an actual Learjet in real life, but since this product was designed with the input of real Lear 35 pilots, I can safely assume it’s been done well. From what I can see having flown bizjets for 20 years now, it’s spot on. The handling quality is sweet, balanced, and well tuned. Trimming, momentum, and effects of gear and flaps all seem accurate, as well as the feeling of liftoff and touchdown. The amount of float, touchdown quality, and steering on the runway seem good to me as well as the powerful reversers that will do most of the work after landing. 

The only thing is since it’s early access, some of the sounds are still lacking or missing. I would love more of the environmental system sounds, as well as a more robust thrust reverser roar, which would be quite loud. However, the engine spool-up and high rpm harmonic “humming” you’d hear from up front is spot on. Brilliant in that audio regard. 

This aircraft is so beautiful to look at, and all parts externally are replicated to perfect scale. My trained eyes usually find things not designed to scale or size, but in this case, I can’t find anything. It’s a perfect visual blueprint of the real thing. With a product this great, the problem is we wish for the release of many more bizjets immediately. Gimme more now!

Grab your Learjet 35A from the FlySimWare store.

2. Kuro 787-8 Dreamliner (freeware)

This little gem is a remake of the default 787-10 that brings forth the smallest 787 variant, the 787-8. This somewhat stubby-looking (perfect in my mind) version makes for an amazing private jet conversion with beautiful liveries available (any airline you want is an option too). This freebie comes updated with Asobo’s default 787-10 stretch (only in the premium deluxe Microsoft Flight Simulator installation), where service upgrades to panels and systems are already complete. The flying quality is great, and I have been able to perform perfect autolands with this model, a sign of a great build. It comes with its own sound set as well. It’s truly a great add-on and one of my favorites of the entire year.

It’s continually updated and available at the flightsim.to website (the greatest place to get all your MSFS 2020 free items and mods).

3. A2A Piper Comanche

This A2A gem is probably most GA flyers’ No. 1 product of the year for sure. I am not an expert on the smaller things, and haven’t used this enough  to give my expert opinion, but sometimes you need to rely on others. This is a living, breathing airplane that has to be maintained and treated well. 

This is a new function that a lot of designers are bringing into their products and MSFS supports constant-state aircraft that save flight times, wear and tear, health and maintenance practices as you fly. It remembers this so even after flying other aircraft, when you go back to this one, as long as you have a constant state toggled, you’ll be using this feature. Real Comanche pilots are heralding this is the best airplane ever for the MSFS series. Some folks have given up flying anything else. 

In my limited experience, I did enjoy the fact that I damaged the engine by not following procedures, proper warm-up, and fouled plugs. You can use a built-in tablet to view engine health as it runs live. The sounds are great and will accompany any problems with accuracy. A2A is known for top-quality sim aircraft and add-ons, and this one has certainly kept its reputation on the top of the pile. 

4. Carenado Turbo Stationair 207 

Recently released via the MSFS Marketplace is the Carenado Cessna (stretched) 207 Turbo Stationair— a spectacular looking replication of the real-life workhorse. For a mere $14, you can grab this beauty. I loved the appearance, sounds, and feel of hand flying this fabulous, fast-and-furious, do-it-all airplane. From short mountain strips to long-haul journeys, this works. And it kinda has that feeling that “maybe someday I could buy one of these things.” 

The aircraft comes with many fabulous variants, like passenger, cargo, pants or no pants, etc. A good variety of paint jobs, or liveries, are also included. I wasn’t expecting this either, and it’s a great addition to my sim that I really enjoy flying again and again.

5. Black Square (Anything it does is amazing)

Fairly new to the flightsim genre is Black Square. It has been making fabulous enhancements to default aircraft like the Bonanza, King Air 350i, and Baron 58 for a while now, complete with more realistic systems, panels, displays, analogue options (six-pack) with aircraft health and vulnerability built in. 

Just a few months ago, Black Square released its first entire airplane, the powerful Daher TBM 850, to compete with the default Asobo version. Some of us really enjoy the slightly older mix of steam gauges and modern stuff, and Black Square has certainly fulfilled many of our wishes. Everything it does is fabulous, and these products really stand out. The Just Flight store has them all here and here on the website.

6. Felis 747-200 for X-Plane 11/12

In my recent article, I went crazy over this X-Plane marvel. The classic 747-200 is simulated from head to tail in “study level” fashion. This is, by far, the most realistic airliner I’ve ever used for any sim, period. It may have to do with the built-in flying properties of XP itself, combined with brilliant programming and realism put into this production. You can actually feel the momentum, weight, and physics all at work as you hand fly this beast, unlike any other heavy jets I have tackled prior. It’s so good that I would recommend getting XP11/12 just for this. 

However, because of the unrefined status of XP12 currently (graphical and performance issues are still a problem when compared to MSFS), I’d recommend it on XP11 for the smoothest experience. Sometime by March, XP12 will be receiving a graphical and performance fix as noted by developer Laminar Research. This may be the actual piece XP fans have been waiting for to challenge MSFS performance and refined photorealistic visuals. 

7. FSRealistic or XPRealistic for both sims

Anyone who has followed me knows I am a huge fan of XPRealistic and FSRealistic. Both are an absolute must have during sim sessions. It adds everything that was left out of the native simulator versions—both by X-Plane and MSFS default programs—including wind, gear thumps, gear drag, flap noises, speed brakes, prop wash, touchdown sounds, thrust reverser roar, water landing sounds, screaming frightened passengers, turbulence-shaking rattles, and added motion and vibrational effects. All these things and more are now available and customizable by the user. It’s easy to use and I could not imagine sim flights without it. Not sure why base sims don’t include more of this style of immersion, but they don’t. These great add-ons are available from many outlets such as mine. 

8. FSLTL live traffic injector for MSFS

Since getting a new, more powerful laptop to run MSFS, I am now tinkering with live traffic. I had always avoided using any traffic due to the hit on performance and increased likelihood of stutters with such a draw on the CPU. But now it’s no longer really an issue. So after trying the built-in default traffic and getting screen freezes, I kept default traffic off and went to freeware third-party vendor FSLTL. 

FSLTL grabs live ADS-B data worldwide and puts the real traffic in sim with actual visual models of the traffic and their airlines if it is an airliner you’re supposed to see. The visual realism is great, and the immersion of seeing lumbering airliners in cue out to the active runway is jaw-dropping. Then they takeoff with a roar over your head or a trail of water vapor in tow if the runway is wet… wow! Seeing contrails in motion or distant aircraft lighting is very realistic. 

If you’re a fan of traffic watching, you can find out who you’re seeing either from the web, apps like FlightRadar24, or a built-in screen that you can open which shows exactly what traffic is being created, aircraft type, airline, and where they are going. 

All of this creates a performance hit. At large airports, it will take maybe 10 to 20 percent off the frame rate compared to what it would have with no traffic selected. That is far less than the hit from default live traffic by Asobo, because you can really allow a lot more traffic to display at any one time (adjustable). On a fast machine, you won’t care. 

For more information, check out the website.

9. FS-ATC Chatter for both sims

This little program available from Stick and Rudder Studios is available for both X-Plane and MSFS platforms. It will automatically play realistic ATC chatter from around the world, depending on where you are and what your current flight regime is. So you’ll hear accurate accents and dialects in each phase of flight. If you’re in Canada, you’ll hear its controllers. You’ll get accurate ground, tower, departure/arrival, center chatter, etc. The program features regular updates, and voice files are added often so you’ll never be bored hearing the same thing over and over. This is another little gem of a program that adds so much realism for both XP and MSFS.

I could keep going, but these are the 2023 add-ons that stand out to me as being exceptional products. There are many more items in my library that I use daily that could be honorable mentions. And it’s possible I have forgotten something. I am sure that 2024 is going to be another super year for this industry.   

The post Best Sim Add-Ons of 2023 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, I’ll be flying the Supermarine S.5, the British racing airplane from the 1920s that pointed the way to one of the most iconic airplanes of World War II—the Spitfire.

This is also the story of the Schneider Trophy, one of the most prestigious prizes in early aviation that sparked fierce international competition to develop the fastest airplanes in the world. The trophy was the brainchild of Jacques Schneider, a French hydroplane boat racer and balloon pilot who was sidelined by a crash injury. Originally an annual contest, starting in 1912, it promised 1,000 British pounds (more than $100,000 today) to the seaplane that could complete a 280-kilometer (107-mile) course in the fastest time. Interrupted by World War I, the contest resumed in 1919 with a new provision: Any country that won three times in a row would keep the trophy permanently. The prize quickly became the focus of intense international rivalry.

Until 1922, the contest was dominated by flying boats—with their fuselages serving as the floating hull—and by the hard-charging Italians—led by the companies Savoia and Macchi, which came close to walking away with three wins and the trophy, scoring average speeds just over 100 mph. But starting in 1923, the Americans introduced floatplanes (streamlined biplanes on pontoons) and took speeds to an entirely new level. Jimmy Doolittle—the famous racer who later led the first World War II bombing raid on Tokyo—won the 1925 race at 232.57 mph, putting the U.S. one step from final victory.

The sole British victory had come in 1922 in a flying boat built by Supermarine Aviation Ltd. Founded in 1913, the Southampton, England-based company had a disappointing record designing aircraft during WWI but since then had enjoyed some limited success ferrying passengers across the English Channel. The company’s chief designer was a young man still in his 20s named Reginald Joseph “R.J.” Mitchell. Desperate not to be shut out by the Italians and Americans, the British Air Ministry backed Mitchell’s efforts to experiment with some radical new designs.

The Supermarine S.4 (the “S” being for Schneider) was a streamlined floatplane, like the American entries, but a monoplane instead of a biplane, constructed mostly of wood and powered by a 680 hp Napier Lion engine. In 1925 it set a world speed record of 226.752 mph, but it proved highly unstable and crashed during trials for the Schneider Trophy race that year. Two years later, Supermarine and Mitchell were back with a revised design: the Supermarine S.5. Three were built and entered in the Schneider competition, numbered 219, 220, and 221. I’ll be flying No. 220 today.

I’ll talk about some of the differences between the S.4 and S.5, but first let’s set the scene. The Schneider Trophy race was hosted by whichever country won the last time. The Italians were victorious in 1926, so the 1927 race was held in Venice. This time, not only was the British government providing financial support, it also sponsored a team of Royal Air Force (RAF) pilots to fly the airplanes.

One of the more curious conditions of the Schneider contest was that the aircraft first had to prove they were seaworthy by floating for six hours at anchor and traveling 550 yards over water. I found taxiing, takeoff, and landing quite bouncy. With its powerful engine and high center of gravity, the S.5 had a tendency to porpoise up and down over the smallest waves.

For all the entries, just keeping the fragile airframes together and the high-powered engines functioning was half the battle. Often, the finicky aircraft broke down or crashed (like the S.4 did in 1925) before they could even begin the race.

The crowds still came. It’s been barely a few months since American Charles Lindbergh crossed the Atlantic, creating a wave of popular enthusiasm for aviation. More than 250,000 spectators have gathered to see the 1927 Schneider race. The course itself is located outside the lagoon, along the Lido. The airplanes must fly seven 47-kilometer laps around the course for a total distance of 320 kilometers (just over 204 miles).

And here we go at full speed across the starting line across from the Hotel Excelsior.

We fly south along the shoreline of the Lido, past the lighthouse at Alberoni, and toward Chioggia.

A steep 180-degree turn at Chioggia, a miniature Venice that built its medieval wealth on its adjoining salt pans…

…then north on the seaward straightaway.

Another hard left turn around the San Nicolo lighthouse…

…then back across the starting line to begin the next lap.

Unlike the S.4, the S.5’s wings are strongly braced by wires. These may add unwanted drag, but they keep the airplane from breaking up under the stress of those high-speed turns.

The S.5 I’m flying, No. 220, is powered by an improved 900 hp Napier Lion piston engine, delivering 220 horsepower more than its predecessor. It has 12 cylinders, arranged in three lines of four cylinders each in the shape of a W, creating the three distinct humps along the nose. The propeller has a fixed pitch.

Fuel was carried inside the two floats, while the oil tank was located inside the tail. The engine was cooled by water, which circulated its heat to copper plates on the wings that served as radiators. Corrugated metal plates along the fuselage served as radiators for the engine oil.

The cockpit is mainly designed to monitor if the engine is overheating—and little else. The goal is to keep rpm close to 3,300, radiator temperature below 95 degrees, and oil temperature below 140 degrees. I’ve found that while the engine may not be air cooled, the flow of air over the radiator surfaces matters a lot. So maintaining a relatively high speed at an efficient engine setting actually helps keep things cool. There’s an airspeed indicator, but it tops out at 400 kilometers per hour, well below our racing speed. There’s no altimeter, and only a rudimentary inclinometer (bubble level) to indicate bank. It’s also nearly impossible to see straight ahead over the engine cowling.

In the cockpit to my right, I have a paper punch card. Every time I pass the finish line, I poke a new hole in it to keep track of how many laps I’ve completed.

Another little twist in the rules: Twice during the race, the aircraft had to “come in contact” with the water—typically a kind of bounce without slowing, which could be very tricky at high speed.

It so happens that  every single airplane except two—both Supermarine S.5s—failed to finish the race in 1927 for one reason or another. Our No. 220, flown by Flight Lieutenant Sidney Webster, finished first with an average speed of 281.66 mph.

The British had won the trophy, but they would have to repeat their performance two more times to keep it for good. To allow more time for aircraft development, participants agreed to hold future competitions every two years, with the next race coming in 1929.

The contest would take place in Supermarine’s home waters off Southampton. The company entered one S.5 and two S.6s. The latter, which had roughly the same design, were now all-metal planes with a new engine with more than twice the horsepower—the 1,900 hp Rolls-Royce R. To keep this monster engine cool, the S.6 needed surface radiators built into its pontoons as well as wings. Not only did one of the S.6s win the 1929 trophy with an average speed of 328.64 mph, but just before the race it set a new world speed record of 357.7 mph.

The British were now one win away from keeping the trophy for good. But with the onset of the Great Depression, the Labour Party-led British government pulled its funding and forbade RAF pilots to fly in the next race in 1931. The decision was wildly unpopular and led to public outcry. Into the fray stepped Lady Lucy Houston, a former suffragette and the second-richest woman in England. Fiercely critical of the Labour Party, she personally pledged to donate whatever funding was needed for Britain to compete in the race.

Backed by 100,000 pounds from Houston (and renewed participation by an embarrassed British government), Supermarine entered six aircraft in the race—two S.5s (including No. 220, which won at Venice), two S.6s, and two brand-new S.6Bs. The S.6B had redesigned floats, but most importantly, an improved Rolls-Royce R engine that delivered an astounding 2,350 horsepower. As it turned out, no other countries entered the competition that year. The S.6B raced alone, achieving an average speed of 340.08 mph. The next day, the S.6B set a new world speed record of 407.5 mph.

There would be no more Schneider Trophy races. With three straight, the trophy was Britain’s to keep, and it remains on display at the Science Museum in London, though few visitors may appreciate what it means. Besides a boost to national pride, the Schneider races propelled aviation forward by leaps and bounds. Today, it might be surprising to realize that the world speed record was consistently set by seaplanes from 1927 to 1935, when the Hughes H-1 Racer finally surpassed them.

The Supermarine S-planes provided Mitchell experience and confidence with incorporating all-metal construction, streamlined monoplane design, innovative wing shapes, and high-performance, liquid-cooled engines. And the S.6s introduced him to working with Rolls-Royce, which built on the lessons learned from its “R” engine to develop a new mass-production engine, starting at 1,000 horsepower, called the Merlin. In the early 1930s, Mitchell would marry these proven high-speed design ideas to the Merlin engine to create the Supermarine Spitfire, the legendary aircraft credited with winning the Battle of Britain during WWII. As for Lady Houston, who supported Supermarine’s entry in the final race, she was later lauded as the “Mother of the Spitfire” for keeping Mitchell’s development efforts alive.

In 1942, the British produced a wartime movie called The First of the Few. It tells the story of Mitchell’s development of the Spitfire, including the key role of the Schneider Trophy races. But the raceplanes themselves were mostly abandoned and ultimately scrapped. Only the Supermarine S.6B that won the 1931 race still survives—now on display at the Solent Sky Museum in Southampton. 

In 1975, Ray Hilborne built a replica of the Supermarine S.5, which was damaged a few years later. Bob Hosie rebuilt it to fly again, inspiring a folk song by Archie Fisher. Sadly, Hosie was killed in 1987 when it crashed. Today his son William Hosie is part of a project to build a new replica of the Supermarine S.5, with hopes to have it flying by 2027. You can learn more about it here.

Meanwhile, the Schneider Trophy race was revived in 1981. Instead of seaplanes, it features small general aviation airplanes as part of the annual British Air Racing Championship.

I hope you enjoyed the story of the Supermarine S.5 and its amazing legacy. If you’d like to see a version of this article with more historical photos and screenshots, you can check out my original post here.

This story was told utilizing the freeware Supermarine S.5 add-on to Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 created by sail1800 and downloaded from flightsim.to.

The post The Story of the Schneider Trophy and the Supermarine S.5 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

With the holidays over, the new countdown for Congress to finalize the FAA bill is on. The twice extended, nearly 800-page draft FAA reauthorization bill is due March 8. 

The FAA bill initially passed the House in July, but the agency’s existing authorization has since been extended twice because of debates in the Senate ranging from aviation to global politics. December was a particularly chaotic time with senators using their valuable pre-holiday time to talk about border security and aid to Ukraine and Israel. They hoped to debate the list of FAA-related items over the past two weeks. However, the Boeing 737 Max 9 midair door plug incident and concerns over the FAA’s diversity and inclusion hiring plans have dominated the media and absorbed attention. Discussions around the FAA bill are now expected to take place in February. 

The overall aim of the bill is to help improve aviation technologies and the workforce by improving FAA efficiency and operations, growing the aviation workforce, upholding America’s gold standard in safety, and encouraging aviation innovation. More specifically, there has been debate around several key issues, including raising the mandatory pilot retirement age from 65 to 67 and increasing the simulator hours a pilot can log as part of the 1,500 hours needed to become an airline transport pilot. In November, Senator John Thune (R-S.D) put forth a compromise proposal to increase loggable simulator hours from 100 to 150.

As part of the National Flight Training Alliance (NFTA), made up of American leaders in the pilot training space, I believe that good will come from raising the simulator hours. 

The simulators of 2024 are not a 1990s DOS-run PC flight simulators with a joystick. The latest advanced simulators often contain an exact replica of a specific aircraft with the same avionics and controls you will find in a real airplane. This enables pilots to practice a whole range of skills, from teamwork and communication to aircraft systems and actual stick and rudder flying, if needed. Moreover, advancements in recent simulator technology, particularly in computer software and graphics, have pushed the immersion and data collection to a whole new level. The advanced data-driven training systems enable pilots and instructors to receive real-time insights and standardized evaluations for continuous pilot training improvement. This is important because efficient and economical performance evaluation is critical to the aviation industry.

These simulations promote the use of critical and evaluative thinking. Events in newer high-fidelity simulators enable students to enthusiastically contemplate the implications of a given scenario. This is vital, especially in recreating and practicing emergency procedures and scenarios, which you don’t want to do in the aircraft. Furthermore, scientific studies, including high-level, peer-reviewed journal articles on human factors, have shown that adding in unpredictability and variability into simulator training sessions improves pilot responses. It requires the pilot to apply the practiced skills and reinforces learning.

Another often overlooked benefit of simulators is teaching in one. The Roman philosopher Seneca said, “When we teach, we learn.” Scientific studies have proven this is true—teaching a topic to your student helps the teacher learn. It’s known as the “protégé effect.” NFTA board members, who include FAA Part 141/161 flight school owners and their CFIs, can attest to this. Many of us view the flight time while teaching, especially in a simulator, as superior compared to other more uneventful and repetitious methods allowed for logging flight experience. 

One can write a full-length book on this “flight training” topic, and if you did, it would be imperative to include the expertise and experience of the individuals involved in the day-to-day flight school world. This FAA bill shouldn’t be any different. It is these individuals who train the private pilots who eventually become commercial pilots who feed the airlines and other institutions. They know that time in an advanced flight simulator is highly beneficial to student pilots and instructors. They see raising the loggable simulator hours from 100 to 150 as a step in the right direction. 

Overall, now is the ideal time to modernize and update flight training in America. The pilot shortage, combined with often outdated and inefficient regulations, makes it vital that the final version of the Securing Growth and Robust Leadership in American Aviation Act allows for innovation in aircraft simulation and education. Aviation is critical to our country’s national infrastructure. This bill will provide industry and FAA Administrator Michael Whitaker with guidance on the next five years—and beyond. 

The post U.S. Senate Has Until Early March to Finalize FAA Reauthorization Bill appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Every once in a while, an “Easter egg” or surprise is released that takes the flight sim community by storm. Just after Christmas, one such egg was hatched. It is the Flysimware Lear 35A.  

At this time, it’s available exclusively from its website. 

I had neither expected nor even heard of this release, though the company has been making fine add-ons for quite a while now for previous versions of Microsoft Flight Simulator (MSFS) and Prepar3d. So, I was slightly behind the power curve here, making it probably more exciting for me than others who already knew this was coming for MSFS2020. 

The corporate jet world is very limited in MSFS. The only true corporate jets of any reputable quality available are the stock Citation CJ4 and Longitude. Now, this Lear 35A truly brings a top-notch add-on to the mix. This was such a beauty I had to get this article out while it was still fresh and new. My initial flights have been easy and hassle-free. Due to its “early access” status, no manual comes with the product as of yet.

For me, a Challenger 300 captain, I believed I could figure this bird out without a problem. And for the most part, I have, from cold, dark start-ups to completing flights and learning as I go. It reminds me of the earlier days in my career flying Beechjets. Battery engine starts, fairly simple fuel management, and a pair of powerful reversers for stopping. Gimme a good pair of thrust reversers any day over the newfangled light jets that have none. Having only brakes to stop a jet is a bad idea in my mind, and maybe that’s one reason so many HondaJets, Phenoms, and CJs seem to have a lot of runway overshoots these days.

The flying and handling quality is fantastic, from what I can tell. I am not a Learjet expert by any stretch of the imagination, but it doesn’t have the easy-to-find flaws I have run into with many other aircraft add-ons over the years. The momentum, engine behavior, flying response and feedback, and maneuverability all seem in check with what I would expect of a real Learjet.

A lot of my praise comes from the fact that a team of real Learjet 35 pilots helped create this early masterpiece, so I feel I can ride with that in my positive evaluation. I am a big proponent of sounds and sound effects, and so far, this one doesn’t disappoint. I had to watch a few real Lear 35A videos on YouTube to compare, and I especially love the add-on’s internal engine spool-up sounds. Spot on! Reminds me of my Beechjet days when those engines had a beautiful harmonic hum on climbout.

One thing that’s missing is the sound of pressurization and air vents, which can be quite loud and fluctuate with the power settings. I hope that effect is added. Reverse thrust, while powerful, creates no noise. The real jet reverser is quite a loud roar. Luckily, FSRealistic solves the reverser noises. You can get FSRealistic at an online store, such as sim market, here. 

I am teaching myself the fuel system. It’s pretty self-explanatory with a great little iPad-type of device that shows systems, weather, weight and balance, etc. With all five tanks in operation and with the clever use of a few simple switches to keep fuel in the right places, you can go almost 2,000 nm. This is only if you’re very good with fuel flow and cruise Mach, as well as knowledgeable on how temperature aloft affects performance. I only see this long cruise happening above FL 400 with temps below ISA traveling at maybe Mach 0.75. Top speed seems to be Mach 0.80 (460 TAS), but you’ll eat up fuel and reduce range to far less. 

• READ MORE: Optimizing PC Performance for MSFS2020

Hand flying this little rocket proves that it is indeed that— a rocket. After a hefty pull on the yoke at VR (with no manual or speeds to reference, I guess, and trim her off when she’s ready…like 130 knots or so) and you’re off and running, 8,000 fpm is easy. Trim nose down to something more reasonable and pull power back to MCT or something less than takeoff power for noise abatement and engine safety. Reaching 4,000 fpm is easy now, flaps up and speed at 250 knots. Very maneuverable and fun to hand fly. Precise trim and balanced controls make this a dream.

After many fun takeoffs, landings, and touch and goes to get a feel for her, it sure feels like a barrel roll is in order. I know the Lear will do this in real life, and at least in sim, FAA inspectors can’t touch your virtual license. Landing the Learjet is straight forward, fun, and easy. It takes a little time getting used to the speed and angle-of-attack gauge if you’re not experienced in jet flying. Great landing quality, and realism is a delight. It’s not overly twitchy and works great with high-quality controls. For home use, I have been incorporating the Honeycomb Flight Controls starter pack (including yoke, pedals, and throttle quadrant), all via Sporty’s Pilot Shop. 

This is such a wonderful jet to fly. It’s one of the greatest I have ever gotten for any flight sim, period. That covers 40 years of this hobby, and the corporate jet realm is extremely limited. X-Plane has certainly offered more over the years, but we are long overdue for some love on the MSFS front, and this product certainly takes the lead. For about $40 you can grab this winner and join the evolving improvements constantly being brought forth by the dedicated team at Flysimware. I’d say this is a five out of five-star quality, even at this early stage. With a product this good, I really hope the company will make more corporate jets, especially the Challenger 300 I fly for real-life employment. 

The post Exploring the Flysimware Lear 35A for <i>MSFS2020</i> appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

There are those who will tell you that aviation gaming is almost as expensive and space intrusive as actual flying. You probably know someone with a virtual cockpit setup that’s larger than the interior of a Cessna 172.

If you are looking for something with considerably less space disruption and small enough to fit in a carry-on bag, check out the Yawman Arrow. The company notes the Yawman controller puts the yoke, throttle, and rudder pedals in your hands. The device went on the market as of Monday for $249, available for purchase at yawmanflight.com and Sporty’s Pilot Shop. The device was created by brothers Thomas and Dwight Nield, professional aviators, and John Ostrower, aviation media creator, and founder of The Air Current.

The company, based in Carmel, Indiana, calls it a “fully functional hand-held cockpit,” noting there are 21 buttons and seven axes available for programming the Yawman Arrow with added multipress capability “optimized for Microsoft Flight Simulator that makes the controller infinitely configurable for everything from basic aircraft function for flying and simulator commands to advanced autopilot interaction.” The goal is to radically reduce the need for both keyboard and mouse/trackpad when flying.

The Arrow was “designed for simmers by simmers.” It is built in the United States and can be a primary controller on simmers’ Windows or Apple laptop, desktop, or Android tablet. Its portability makes it different from other devices as it can be used on the road with a gaming laptop or Android tablet, or cast to a television from a laptop.

“This has been a methodical journey to bring together all the familiar pieces of flight simulation hardware into an ultra-mobile form factor without compromising the virtual flying experience,” said Yawman co-founder Thomas Nield. “We have achieved that, and we are excited to deliver it to the simming community. We’ve brought a deliberate precision to Yawman, making it a multifunction controller that requires no additional configuration software to maximize its plug-and-play utility.”

The Arrow is designed to work with virtual aircraft of all types, from smaller general aviation airplanes and helicopters to high-performance fighters and commercial jets. Company officials note the portable controller can be used for real-world flight familiarization, preparation, and training without complex hardware.

The Details

The Arrow features controls for pitch, yaw, and roll, and two vernier-style engine controls like those found on many piston-powered aircraft. When the player is flying a jet, these controls activate spoilers and thrust reversers.

The device has an integrated trim wheel, along with two shoulder bumper buttons, a five-button D-pad, and five-way hat switch for independent viewing angles and video recording. The user can access a multifunction six-pack of programmable buttons to customize their flight experience.

The Arrow is fully compatible with Microsoft Flight Simulator on PC, Laminar Research X-Plane on PC and macOS, Infinite Flight for Android, Lockheed Martin Prepar3D, DCS World—and more—as well as nonsimulation games that support HID joystick controls. However, it is not compatible with iOS devices or Xbox.

We Test It

FLYING had a chance to test fly the Arrow. I was assisted by Michael Puoci, one of my learners who is a professional aviation game designer. When Puoci, call sign “Puffin,” was training for his private pilot certificate, he utilized sim technology as an enrichment tool, flying every lesson at least twice before he got out to the airplane That’s the beauty of the syllabus; he knew what was coming next and was able to prepare.

Puoci builds games and test flies them on a regular basis. We met at the Museum of Flight in Seattle. He was armed with his laptop loaded with X-Plane 12 for the demonstration. We tried the Arrow in a Cessna 172 as that is the airframe we both have the most time in.

It was easy to set up the Arrow to interface with X-Plane—just a few clicks. No additional software configuration was required.

• READ MORE: Setting Up Your Sim

Full disclosure: I had never attempted to fly using a game controller before, so there was a learning curve.

During the takeoff from virtual King County International Airport/Boeing Field (KBFI), the left turning tendency got the better of me as I had to use my fingertips for what my feet usually do. It took me a few minutes to get the hang of using light touch adjustments, especially on the trim. I teach my learners pitch, power trim to level off, and it was a challenge to adjust the right lever for power and not to over trim.

It took me a few minutes to achieve coordinated flight, and I found myself physically tilting the Arrow, rather than activating the proper controls, until my hands figured what to do to achieve what I wanted. We had to try stalls too, which are a rudder-dependent maneuver. I did one, then Puochi did one. Learning took place.

If you want to take your aviation sim on the road, the Arrow was meant for you. The unit requires one available USB port (cable included) and weighs 7.83 ounces (222 grams) and does not require batteries or charging.

Shop the Setup

The post Yawman Arrow Hand-Held Cockpit Released appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Today in Microsoft Flight Simulator, I’ll be checking out the F-16. And to get things rolling, I’ll be flying one of its most historic missions: the 1981 Israeli bombing raid to take out Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor.

Originally produced by General Dynamics, which has since sold its aircraft business to Lockheed Martin, the F-16 came about in the early 1970s in response to the shortcomings of the F-4 Phantom, which saw murderous attrition rates in the skies over Vietnam, and the introduction of new, more advanced Soviet fighters such as the MiG-25.

While the primary response took the form of the twin-engine F-15 Eagle, a “fourth generation” fighter billed as the ultimate air superiority fighter, a small cadre within the U.S. Air Force argued for also developing a smaller, single-engine fighter as a complement to the top-shelf (but expensive) F-15.

Known as the “Fighter Mafia,” this group, led by Korean War fighter pilot John Boyd and mathematician Thomas Christie, developed a formula called “energy-maneuverability theory” to quantify and model a fighter’s combat performance. Their theory called for an agile, lightweight fighter that could make fast changes in direction to get inside the enemy’s decision-making loop.

The project gave rise to a competition, which ultimately came down to two contenders: the General Dynamics YF-16 and the Northrop YF-17. In part because it shared the same engine with the F-15, the Air Force chose the F-16. But the YF-17 didn’t fade into history as it went on to become the Navy’s F-18 Hornet.

The F-16 that the Fighter Mafia inspired was immediately recognizable as a fighter pilot’s fighter. The bubble canopy provided unobstructed views in every direction, while the seat angled back 30 degrees to mitigate the effect of G-forces on the pilot.

The heads-up display (HUD), press-button display screens, and automated start-up checklist all simplified tasks for the pilot. The F-16 was the first fighter that was fly-by-wire. The traditional stick, mechanically connected to aircraft’s controls, was replaced with a sidestick—almost like a gaming joystick— from which gentle nudges are enough to transmit electronic instructions to the computerized flight control system.

Computerized flight control was a necessity as well as a convenience, because the F-16 was designed to be aerodynamically unstable to maximize agility. Its single Pratt & Whitney F-100 turbofan produces a thrust-to-weight ratio greater than 1-to-1, boosting its maneuverability even further.

The wings and belly featured 11 hard points for attaching a wide array of missiles, bombs, extra fuel tanks, and electronics pods—up to 8 tons worth—for different types of missions. Unlike the F-4 Phantom, which initially lacked any guns for close-in dogfighting, the F-16 was also armed with a 20 mm M61 Vulcan six-barrel rotary cannon on the left shoulder of the cockpit, capable of firing 100 rounds per minute.

Dubbed the “Fighting Falcon” by General Dynamics, the F-16 quickly became known to its pilots and crew as the “Viper.” Perhaps its profile reminded them of a snake ready to strike, but for many, it also called to mind the Viper starfighters in the original Battlestar Galactica TV series.

Overall, the F-16, was about a quarter the size of the F-15, about a third the weight, and initially cost $12.7 million per airplane, less than half the $28 million sticker price for an F-15—a fact that made it immediately attractive to export customers looking to buy a modern multipurpose fighter.

With General Dynamics’ production facility in Fort Worth, Texas, gearing up to deliver a large initial order for the U.S. Air Force, one of the first American allies to place an order was the Shah of Iran. But when Islamic revolutionaries overthrew the shah and took U.S. diplomats hostage, that order was placed on hold, and the airplanes were offered to Israel instead.

For the Israelis, the F-16s were a godsend, because they already had a mission in mind for them. It’s the mission we’re preparing to depart on, at about 3 o’clock in the afternoon on June 7, 1981, at Etzion Airbase—now Taba International Airport (HETB) in Egypt—in the then-Israeli-occupied Sinai peninsula.

The target—nearly 1,000 miles away—was the Osirak nuclear power plant on the southeast outskirts of Baghdad. Purchased from the French, protected by sand berms and dozens of advanced antiaircraft missiles, the huge project was nearly ready to go online and start producing plutonium for an Iraqi nuclear bomb that Israel’s leaders viewed as a mortal threat.

There were eight F-16s in the strike force, and I’m flying tail number 107. Originally, it was going to be flown by strike leader Zeev Raz, but he worried that something might be wrong with its navigation system, so he turned it over to his wingman, Amos Yadlin.

To have any chance of reaching their target and returning, the F-16s are heavily laden with extra fuel tanks mounted on each wing (compatible with ones the Israelis already used for their F-4s), as well as centerline fuel tanks they were able to urgently wheedle out of an unwitting Pentagon.

To lighten the load, they tossed out all the electronic countermeasure (EC) equipment normally used to protect against surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) and carried only a single heat-seeking Sidewinder air-to-air missile on each wingtip, as well as two 1,000-pound dumb bombs, one under each wing. (I can’t depict bombs here, so their place is taken by HARM missiles).

The F-16’s range was being stretched to its very limit. As they waited on the ramp for the word to take off, each F-16 was “hot refueled”—topped off with fuel while its engine was running—a highly dangerous procedure.

The airplanes were well over their maximum takeoff weight and would take the entire length of the 13,000-foot (4,000-meter) runway to lift off. At 4 p.m., the order came, and one by one the F-16s, on full afterburner, began their excruciatingly slow roll down the runway. And the F-16 is off on its very first flight in anger…

From the Sinai, the airplanes will skirt Jordanian airspace, flying across the Saudi Arabia desert to reach Iraq. To avoid radar detection—and interception by the Jordanian, Saudi, or Iraqi air forces—we’ll fly the entire route there at just 100 feet above ground level. That means we must immediately descend from Etzion Air Base (at 2,415 feet above sea level) to the Gulf of Aqaba on the Red Sea.

By sheer coincidence, King Hussein of Jordan happened to be out on his yacht in the Gulf and watched in shock as the eight low-flying F-16s thundered right over him. While their Israeli markings had actually been removed, he immediately guessed they were an Israeli strike bound for Osirak. Hussein called to alert his country’s air defenses and pass the word to Baghdad, but apparently the message never got through.

Within minutes, the airplanes had crossed—otherwise undetected—into Saudi Arabia, where they followed the twisting route of the waddis (dry desert ravines) through the coastal mountain range.

Practicing for the mission had posed quite a challenge, because the distance was far longer than Israel’s entire length. They had to run multiple laps from the northern border with Lebanon down to the tip of the (then-occupied) Sinai and out over the Mediterranean Sea to simulate the mission. 

While the Israeli pilots were all combat veterans, they were used to brief sorties to Israel’s threatened borders and back—rarely more than an hour in the cockpit from start to finish. In training, they found the experience of flying long distances extremely fatiguing.

The concentration required to fly at just 100 feet off the ground at 360 knots for nearly 90 minutes to Baghdad was exhausting. I’m flying so low, at times, that I’m kicking up a cloud of dust behind me.

Apparently undetected, we can send back the one-word radio transmission, “Moscow,” that will inform our superior waiting anxiously back at Etzion that we have reached roughly a quarter of the way to Baghdad.

In a few more minutes, we face a moment of truth. To reduce weight and conserve remaining fuel, we must jettison the empty auxiliary tanks under our wings. However, this has never been done before at these speeds and altitudes next to live bombs. The technicians say it should work, but there’s also a chance the tanks, once released, could topple over the wings and damage the controls or bang into and set off the bombs next to them. As it turns out, though, the jettison goes smoothly, and the wing tanks fall harmlessly into the middle of the Saudi desert. Without their weight, the F-16s speed up slightly to around 380 knots.

Mile after mile of trackless desert passes just 100 feet below. Almost 45 minutes into our flight, as we hurl ourselves closer to the Iraqi border, it’s time to transmit the one-word code, “Zebra,” which indicates we are half of the way to our target—right under the noses of Saudi radar. There are no landmarks to indicate that we’ve crossed into Iraqi airspace, except for the sun gradually moving lower in the sky. Baghdad is an hour ahead of Israel, and the strike is planned to hit right around dinnertime.

Suddenly, out of the desert, a vital mission landmark: the Bahr al-Milh (“Sea of Salt”), also known as Lake Razazza, a vast artificial body of water created in the 1970s to contain the overspill from the Euphrates River about 60 miles southwest of Baghdad. An island in the lake is supposed to serve as the initial point (IP), where the pilots will arm their bombs and begin the attack sequence. But because of fluctuating water levels, the critical island is submerged and nowhere to be seen, and this has thrown trike commander Raz, off his stride. There’s little time to absorb this as the F-16s cross the Euphrates River and enter the famed Fertile Crescent. Six F-15 fighters that have escorted the F-16 strike force now streak upward to 20,000 feet to provide air cover and electronic jamming for the bombing run. That—and their own speed—are the only real defense the F-16s will have.

The attack itself plays out in a matter of seconds.  At a designated point 4 miles northwest of the target, we punch the afterburners and pop up in a climb, taking us to roughly 8,000 feet. To avoid negative Gs, we roll inverted at the top. At this moment,  Yadlin (in our plane, 107) realizes that Raz, who was supposed to be first, has overshot the target and is starting a loop to come up and over behind him. 

Not delaying a moment, Yadlin begins his bombing run, aiming at a 30-degree dive straight toward the Osirak reactor. At roughly 3,500 feet, with his HUD’s target indicator directly on the dome of the reactor, he releases his bombs…

…and, to avoid both the ground and the (delayed-fuse) blast, punches the afterburner and pulls up immediately into a steep-turning climb to the left. While the rest of the F-16s drop their bombs in turn, we fly as fast and high as possible, straining right up to the airplane’s 9G limit.

In fact, the strike had caught the Iraqi air force and air defenses sleeping. While later waves caught some antiaircraft fire, not a single Israeli F-16 was hit. At least eight of the 16 bombs they carried scored direct hits on the Osirak reactor, completely destroying it. Ten Iraqi soldiers and one French nuclear technician were killed, mostly by misdirected ground fire. The raid had lasted a total of two minutes.

Reassembling at 30,000 feet over Baghdad, the F-16s expected to be pursued by Iraqi fighters, but not one took off. Instead, the element of surprise obliterated, they climbed to 38,000 feet for the return trip home. Flying at higher altitude in thinner air would help conserve the fuel they needed for the task. Rather than fly at 40,000 feet as planned and face a headwind, they stay at 38,000 even though that creates a visible contrail in the moister air.

Tired but elated, they made a direct beeline across Jordanian airspace, hoping they would be long gone before fighters could scramble to high altitude to intercept them. Finally, as the sun set, they crossed back into Israeli airspace and initiated their landing patterns back at Etzion Air Base. All eight F-16s returned unscathed, with barely a drop of fuel left in their tanks. The daring success of the raid stunned both Israeli’s enemies and allies and earned the F-16 its combat spurs.

The markings you may have noticed on the nose of 107 show the Osirak raid plus 6.5 later air-to-air kills against Syrian MiGs and helicopters in Lebanon. The airplane is currently displayed at the Israeli Air Force Museum in Hatzerim. For details of the mission, I highly recommend the book Raid on the Sun by Rodger Claire.

The U.S. Air Force ordered more than 2,200 F-16s, which served on the front lines of the Cold War as well as both wars with Iraq and no-fly zones over Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Libya. Most F-16s are single-seat fighters, but every order usually comes with a few two-seat variants, either for flight instruction or more complex, demanding missions. The earliest round of F-16s were designated A (single seat) and B (two seat), while later, upgraded versions of the airplane were designated C/D and E/F, each with its one-seat and two-seat variants.

Most U.S. F-16s are painted various shades of gray. This particular aircraft was given a special “desert camouflage” paint job to commemorate the first air-to-air kill by an F-16 in U.S. Air Force service during Operation Southern Watch.

After the first Gulf War, Saddam Hussein used his air force to strafe and bomb uprisings against him by Kurds in the north and Shiites in the south. In response, the United Nations passed a resolution authorizing coalition aircraft to enforce a no-fly zone over both parts of the country. On December 27, 1992, an Iraqi MiG-25 crossed into the southern no-fly zone, only to find itself trapped by a group of F-16s of the 33rd Fighter Squadron led by then-Lieutenant Colonel Gary North. North fired an AIM-120 AMRAAM missile that took down the MiG. It was not only the first kill for an F-16 in U.S. Air Force service but the first for the new AIM-120 missile as well.

The message was sent and received. After that, Air National Guard and active-duty squadrons rotated through the region, patrolling the skies over Iraq for more than a decade until the invasion of Iraq in 2003. The role of the F-16 in the skies over Iraq complemented the F-15. While the F-15 tended to operate above 15,000 feet, focusing on air superiority, the F-16 made optimal use of its power and agility at lower altitudes to perform a variety of missions, from lower-level interdiction to bombing and strafing enemy units on the ground.

One of the most dangerous missions the F-16 performed was pairing with older F-4s as “Wild Weasels,” whose job it was to find and destroy SAM sites. In this case, they did use the AG-88 HARM missile, referred to when fired as “Magnum.” F-16 pilot Dan Hampton related his colorful experiences as a Wild Weasel over Iraq—including with the 77th Fighter Squadron “Gamblers” depicted above—in his memoir Viper Pilot.

Meanwhile, back home, since 1983 the F-16 has been the public face of the U.S. Air Force, flown by its Thunderbirds demonstration team that performs aerobatics at sports games and other major events.

In popular culture, the F-16 was also featured in the 1984 action-adventure film Iron Eagle, starring Louis Gossett Jr.. The movie fared poorly against the far more popular Top Gun than year. Interestingly, Iron Eagle was filmed in Israel using Israeli F-16s, because (unlike the Navy) the U.S. Air Force refused to sign on to the movie.

At the real Top Gun, the Navy has recruited the F-16 to play “aggressor” against its own top pilots, at its new location at NAS Fallon in Nevada. So has the U.S. Air Force at its own exercise range at Nellis AFB in Nevada. Even the U.S. Space Force now has its own squadron of aggressor F-16s.

Top Aces, a private company founded by Canadian fighter pilots, recently purchased a batch of older F-16s from Israel. From its operating base in Mesa, Arizona, the company has contracts with Canada, Germany, and Australia to provide “aggressor” training for their air forces.

Meanwhile, starting in 2003, Israel has ordered 102 of its own specially designed F-16I model, dubbed “Sufa,meaning “Storm”. All of them are two-seaters and feature a distinctive “spine” carrying a suite of electronics and equipment uniquely suited for Israeli Air Force needs.

Besides the U.S. and Israel, 24 other countries have purchased the F-16. One of the earliest to do so was Pakistan in the wake of the 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. During the 1980s, Pakistani F-16s shot down several Soviet aircraft intruding over the border from Afghanistan. However, in response to Pakistan’s pursuit of a nuclear bomb to rival India, starting in 1990 the U.S. imposed sanctions on Pakistan. New aircraft were impounded, and spare parts for existing airplanes were cut off, effectively grounding Pakistan’s F-16 fleet.

These sanctions were quickly tossed aside in the wake of the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Pakistan now fields a total of 75 new and upgraded F-16s as its primary fighter. It has fought in both air-to-air battles with India’s mainly Russian-designed aircraft and in ground bombing operations against Taliban militants in places like the Swat Valley.

The world’s third largest user of F-16s, after the U.S. and Israel, is Turkey, which boasts a total of 245. Only the first eight of these, in fact, were made in the U.S. Along with Belgium, the Netherlands, and South Korea, Pakistan manufactures its own F-16s under license from Lockheed Martin, though they are regulated under U.S. arms export laws. Turkish F-16s have been used extensively in bombing campaigns against Kurdish rebels, as well as aerial skirmishes during the Syrian civil war. Most notably, one shot down a Russian Air Force Su-24 along the Turkish-Syrian border in 2015.

Like many countries fielding F-16s, Turkey hoped to replace it with the new F-35, placing an initial order for 30. However, the U.S. Congress, angered at Turkey’s purchase of the Russian-made S-400 air defense system, barred F-35 sales to Turkey. While the U.S. has offered to use Turkey’s $1.4 billion payment (already made) to upgrade its F-16s, the Turkish government has announced that it is working on its own homegrown, fifth-generation jet fighter, called the TF Kaan, to replace its F-16s as well as for export.

Greece also maintains a sizable fleet of F-16s, 135 total. Although they are both NATO allies, tensions between Greece and Turkey have led to a striking occurrence: “mock” dogfights between the two countries’ F-16s that are intense enough to lead to tragedy. In May 2006, two Greek F-16s intercepted a Turkish reconnaissance airplane along with its two F-16 escorts off the Aegean Sea island of Karpathos. A dogfight ensued in which a Greek F-16 and Turkish F-16 collided. The Turkish pilot ejected safely, but the Greek pilot was killed.

Speaking of international tensions, some of the most hotly contested sales of F-16s over the years have been to Taiwan. During a visit there, I was able to spot several of them taxiing to and from their protective concrete bunkers while arriving at Hualien Airport (RCYU) on the island’s east coast.

The Republic of China on Taiwan, which the Chinese government sees as a rebel province and many view as a vital U.S. ally, has accumulated a fleet of roughly 150 F-16s, starting in the early 1990s. Each time the U.S. sells more F-16s to Taiwan, upgrades existing ones, or sells the advanced missiles they use, it must weigh the boost to Taiwan’s defenses (to aid in a long-awaited Chinese invasion) versus the risk of upsetting relations with Beijing. In recent years, however, with U.S.-China tensions on the rise, the instinct in Washington, D.C., has been to give Taiwan more of the weapons it wants, including (in 2019) 66 new aircraft plus upgrading older A/B models to the improved F-16V.

If the F-16 I’m flying out of Hualien looks like it’s wearing shoulder pads, those are conformal fuel tanks (CFTs), which make up part of the new upgrades and add to the F-16s range without an appreciable negative effect on aerodynamic performance. Several countries have adopted the CFTs for their F-16s, but somewhat curiously, the U.S. Air Force has not. Perhaps that’s because the F-16 plays a more specialized role as part of a much larger air force, especially as it is gradually phased out in favor of the F-35.

These days, Taiwan’s F-16s are regularly scrambled to intercept Chinese incursions into the ADIZ (Air Defense Identification Zone) surrounding its airspace, an average of more than four per day in 2022. In fact, nearly 9 percent of Taiwan’s entire defense budget now goes to responding to these incursions. If any actual invasion ever happened, Taiwan’s F-16s would be at the pointy end of the spear, operating from secret and improvised airfields to contest air superiority and, ideally, strafe and bomb the Chinese landing forces until, the Taiwanese hope, U.S. forces could arrive and join them.

That day may or may not come, but with more and more U.S. allies in Europe looking to transition to F-35s, they are laying the groundwork for sending their F-16s to join the fight in Ukraine. The Netherlands, Denmark, and Norway have all pledged to send their surplus F-16s to Ukraine, and Ukrainian pilots have been training in Romania to fly them. So while this Ukrainian F-16 I’m flying over Kyiv might be fiction today, very soon it may be writing the latest epic chapter in the 40-plus year history of the Viper.

More than 4,600 F-16s have been produced, making it the world’s most numerous fixed-wing aircraft in military service. I hope you enjoyed learning more about its ongoing story.

If you’d like to see a version of this article with more historical photos and screenshots, you can check out my original post here.

• READ MORE: Recreating the Final Flight of the Red Baron

Note: This story was told utilizing the F-16 add-on to Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 by SC Designs, along with liveries and sceneries produced by fellow users and shared on flightsim.to for free.

The post Simulating a Bombing Raid in an F-16 appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Glitches, errors, crashes, stutters, and nothing but aggravation with running your PC sim can sometimes seem the norm. If you’re a die hard “flight simmer” you already know all about the vast resources available via fellow hobbyists, Facebook groups, online forums, and more. They are fabulous for both resources and camaraderie. Maybe one of the best reasons for social media today. Instant help, FAQs, and fellow simmers and real world pilots ready to lend a hand when everything goes down the tubes. 

Since that beautiful day in August of 2020 when Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 (MSFS2020) was born, some of us have had a pretty delightful time of it. Little trouble and mostly a great experience. There are others, however, who have had nothing but headaches and misery. 

Why is that? Let’s look at some issues and their solutions, along with general operating tips and hints, that have helped me through a recent upgrade to a better flight simming machine. 

I must say immediately that “less is more.” Anyone using a computer for work, office, graphic design, etc., probably won’t have as much luck with MSFS2020  as someone with a dedicated gaming or flight simming PC. It’s just that simple. A PC that is not crammed full of the extra programs the average office computer is bloated with will always serve you better.

I recently purchased a high-end laptop to use for all my sim needs. A 4090 GeForce graphics card is the highest you can go. However, the top-rated MSI machine I chose at first didn’t have “GSYNC” technology in its display which meant that running MSFS2020 resulted in choppy graphics and screen tearing issues despite blazing fast frame rates. In the past, I had always chosen GSYNC computers, but for some reason this one slipped right past me. I returned it immediately for a GSYNC Asus ROG 18 gaming laptop and couldn’t be happier with the smoothness and performance. 

All that is to say I highly recommend a GSYNC based computer and video display. I now see frame rates over 100 where my old 3070 laptop maxed out at about 50 in rural areas. I have to give a shoutout to my local Boston Microcenter for being such a great place to purchase technology such as my new beast of a laptop. You’ll probably never find a good sim PC in a typical store. Specific online retailers specializing in high performance PCs and gaming laptops are pretty much the only way to go. Personally, for something this valuable, I like being able to return it in person if something goes wrong.

Let’s face it, MSFS2020 is very demanding and requires a great gaming-style PC with high end hardware. That said, most computers and laptops built since 2020 do a pretty great job of running it right out of the box. The problem is no two computers are the same and everyone on earth will have a different set of experiences to report. Many having non-stop issues with the sim have an old or slow computer. Some may have newer, powerful machines that still run everything poorly due to outdated drivers, bloatware, overly clogged hard drives, or actual hardware issues. 

In my recent upgrade to a better gaming laptop, I had a some @#%$!!! moments myself. I would say if you’re having trouble with poor performance, crashes, freezes, and nonstop aggravation with your sim, then simply reset windows to new and use the option to do a complete restore. This will wipe the drive clean, leaving nothing behind. Doing this will ensure getting as new a PC as possible with no bad files or programs left behind to do bad things. In my experience, the time it takes to do a reset (about an hour is all) is way faster than spending days trying to troubleshoot.

Let’s say you do this or actually get a new computer. There is a lot of “junk” to be done before you install the sim and hopefully the things I’ll talk about here will help someone out there! If I can help at least one fellow pilot or flight simmer solve their issues, it will be worth it. 

Before anything can be done, make sure you have a great internet connection. This program will not install or run well on slow internet, period. This can be a major issue for folks in places where the internet is poor and spotty. It can make using MSFS2020 nearly impossible. This is where X-Plane can be the sim of choice, as you can use it easily offline without any internet. 

Here are some important steps to take (in order) after a new install of Windows or getting a new PC:

Windows Updates 

Go to the search box on the bottom area of the desktop, (the one with the magnifying glass symbol). Type in “update” and then click on “Check for updates”. You’ll be brought to the main update interface. Next, click on update and let it go. Now, you may be prompted to do this several times and some “restarts to take effect” will occur. If it hasn’t been done in a while, this could take time (possibly hours depending on your internet speed). Once it says  “your computer is up to date,” you’re ready to do more. 

Startup, Sleep, and Shutdown Options

Type in “Closing lid” in the search box. Click on “Change what closing the lid does” which will bring you to the options to select variables under the heading “Define power buttons and turn on password protection.” Be sure to stop all sleep, snooze, and lid closing options. Having a computer “hibernate” when attempting to run a sim for hours will cause issues! Also, click the “Change settings that are currently unavailable” link to get access to the “Shutdown settings” section. Once there, uncheck “Turn on fast startup” to disable that feature. Experts say to shut off this option as it can introduce problems and system hangs since using fast start was originally meant to speed things up, but can also cause instability and issues if not everything got loaded properly. I have always shut it off on my computers and honestly my laptop boots just as fast and with less worry.

Editing Advanced Power Settings 

Editing these settings will enable you to change the way the processor and other components run. First, type “Edit Power Plan” into the search box. Then click on “Change advanced power settings.” Don’t allow them to reduce less than 100 percent off the max settings, and if on a laptop, don’t allow anything less than 100 percent unless the machine is not plugged in, like on battery. Spend time to look around at all the options and don’t just accept the default ones as good. You need all the power you can get! Hard Disk,  Desktop background settings, Sleep, PCI Express, Processor power management, Display, and Battery options all need to be tweaked for power and not rest. Computers don’t need naps, only pilots do.

USB Controllers

Type “Device Manager” into the search bar. Click on it and then navigate down to “USB serial bus controllers”. Click on that and find “USB Hub” in the dropdown menu. Right click on USB Hub and select “Properties”. Click on the “Power Management” tab, where you will find another hidden option allowing you to uncheck the “Allow the computer to run off this device to save power” box. As we use many connected hardware devices, having a USB port suddenly napping away, can cause the sim to freeze or lock up sometimes. This option may work if you have any issues where the controls aren’t working fast enough or you get sim lockups. 

Game Mode 

Go back to the search bar, type “Game Mode” and select “Game Mode settings.” Click the toggle to turn OFF Game Mode. Most experts say not to use “game mode,” so (to be honest) without much evidence, I leave it off as well. Hopefully it’s not just a placebo. However, once you search for game mode, you’ll find an option under “Related Settings” called “Graphics.”  Click on that and you’ll see a list of programs. Look for Microsoft Flight Simulator or X-Plane and click on it. Next, click “Options”  and choose the one for  “high performance.”. Click Save. This is a new feature and seems to be one that many experts suggest. 

HAGS

Hardware-accelerated GPU scheduling (HAGS) is necessary for 4000 series NVIDIA cards to get the best quality and performance as well as the new DLSS and frame generation technology. This can also be enabled on the “Graphics” page (if needed, you can navigate back to it by typing “Graphics” in the search bar and selecting “Graphics settings”). Once there, click on “Change default graphics settings” and make sure the Hardware-accelerated GPU scheduling toggle is set to ON. Below HAGS, also set the toggle for Optimizations for windowed games to ON. If you have a lower card like a 2 or 3000 series, it may be better to leave HAGS off. Experiment to see. 

Windows Defender 

Next, type in and click on “Windows Security.” Go to Virus & threat protection and find Virus & threat protection settings. Click on “Manage settings” and scroll down to “Exclusions.” Select “Add or remove exclusions” then “Add an exclusion.” From the dropdown menu, pick “Folder.” From there, find and select your install directory for the sim you use. Now processing power won’t be used to scan this while you’re busy flying. Less intrusion is necessary! MSFS2020 and all my other games run from the Steam network so I just have the entire steam folder selected to ignore my games and sims I use. Defender is all you’d ever need to keep your PC safe in the first place. It is well made and doesn’t slow down your PC by keeping it active. 

Nvidia Drivers 

I personally prefer Nvidia graphics cards. For a long time, it’s been widely accepted in the sim community that they provide the highest quality and power for a sim. Nowadays, I could be wrong on this as gamers have accepted–and some even prefer–Ryzen. For me, I am sticking with Nvidia. If you have a Nvidia or Ryzen machine, you’ll need to upgrade to the latest or near-to latest drivers. Realistically, something less than a year old will do. Googling your specific card  is probably the best way to bring up your upgrade options. As always, when upgrading on Nvidia, be sure to choose the “Custom Installation” option and check the “Perform a clean installation” box to completely clear out old drivers and do a fresh install. 

Nvidia Control Panel or Other GPU interface 

It’s extremely important to make sure your main graphics card is listed as either the only one or top priority. On my laptop, I have a Nvidia Control Panel whereby I can select my 4090 graphics card as the priority and main card to use during any gaming or simulation, or just always use it bypassing the internal one on the motherboard. You can’t run any sim on an internal graphics processor. Usually this hassle is only on a laptop. With Nvidia, I have found that customizing settings to anything other than default usually doesn’t result in any added benefit to performance or quality. Some may disagree and have had good luck. The only thing I might change is the option to always use maximum performance vs. normal, but then again, even in default normal, the GPU will go to highest performance when required. Snake oil? No clue on this one. After years of fiddling I still have no proof. All I can say is less “tweaking” seems to result in the best performance and quality overall.

Getting Rid of Bloatware 

One of the most beneficial and satisfying things to do for me is to get rid of system hogging, clogging programs like any outside antivirus software. It’s not necessary and will cause system slowdowns, intrusions, and worse. Windows Defender is plenty all by itself. So via the search bar look up “Add or remove programs” and click on it., Go down the list and uninstall things like McAfee antivirus, Norton antivirus, Windows Office (a massive hog), and other junk a flight simmer will never need. Years ago, virus were a big threat. They’re much less these days, and I used to always find computers so bogged down, so slow and unresponsive, because they are plagued by antivirus software that everyone is told to use. Throw it all out. Just be careful not to delete something either Windows requires or you may need later. 

• READ MORE: Tips and Tricks for Flight Sims

Installing MSFS2020

Once you install the sim for the first time you don’t have to do anything with the so called “community folder.” However, if you have either a pre-existing installation or items you had downloaded or purchased, those are going to need to be re-installed. 

That “Community Folder” Thing…

All the addons you purchase or download for free will be placed into the “community” folder. Become familiar with it as during updates it’s important to temporarily either empty it out (i.e. select all, cut [ctrl-x] and paste the contents elsewhere [ctrl-v], or rename it to something like [Community_backup]. This must be done prior to any Asobo Studio pushed updates. You’ll know it’s time as you’ll be prompted to update. Just exit out the sim, and do this procedure, then re-start the sim and let it do it’s update thing. Once done, you can place your community folder contents back where they were prior to the forced update.

The location of your community folder depends on whether your MSFS2020 is from the Microsoft Store or Steam. 

The location for a Microsoft Store installation is:

C:\Users\YourUsername\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.Flight Simulator_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache\Packages\Community

The location for a Steam Store installation is:

C:\Users\YourUsername\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft Flight Simulator\Packages\Community

If you’re redoing a new installation from scratch–or just a new one from a new computer–do not just “copy” over your pre-existing community folder. I ran into trouble when I did this by just dragging the community folder over onto my new PC, and trying to install the sim. MSFS2020 failed to update properly on installation and all my addons didn’t work right. The sim was unusable and crashed, as I believe the underlying paths to installed options made the new installation think they were still in the area they were on the previous PC. In any event, a new installation with you re-downloading your add-ons and not including them in the community folder during the installation is the only way to do this error free. You should be flying high now.

I hope this helps at least one person out there get the best out of their sim with the least amount of anguish. For those of you who are real pilots, I can hear it now, “it’s much easier just to fly a real plane.” Well, kinda…But addicted sim geeks like me know we can’t live without both, real and virtual.

The post Optimizing PC Performance for <i>MSFS2020</i> appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

My last official entry in my logbook as a real-world private pilot was in July 2019. The school where I was a renter had a Piper Arrow, and it was time for some recurrency training with my instructor. The intervening years since that flight passed quickly as my wife and I were focused on our two young children, balancing the obligations of our careers, navigating the COVID-19 experience, then moving to a new town. In May, a good friend invited me to join him on a night flight to help round out his flying requirements before starting his training program at a regional airline later this summer.

Thrilled with the chance to go flying again, I found my flight gear in the basement, grabbed my aviation headset, kissed my wife and kids good night, and hurried off to the airport to meet my friend.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

As I would be a front-seat passenger on the flight, I intended to observe the goings-on and effectively get a reintroduction to the world of GA that I had missed over the last few years. From previous articles, you may recall that I am a vocal proponent for the use of home flight simulation, a believer that the benefits of a modest setup can engage the user in aviation decision-making, learning, and fun. However, having not flown a real-world flight in four years, it felt like sufficient time had passed where I could be reminded and maybe surprised about some facets of the experience I had forgotten.

• READ MORE: To Providence or Bust, in Simulated Flight

Driving to the Airport

I did not expect to enjoy it, but the drive to the airport provided some post-workday decompression and reflection time. I’d be joining my friend at Plymouth Municipal Airport (KPYM), located 30 miles south of Boston on Massachusetts’ southeastern coast. Usually, the 90-plus-minute drive from my home to the airport would be arduous and traffic-filled, but the relatively late departure gave me an unusually stress-free drive. It felt great to have my flight gear on the seat next to me again, a little stiff and dusty from lack of use, but ready to go.

I used some of the windshield time to think ahead about where I could try and be a helpful addition to the flight. Pulling off the highway to stop for fuel, I opened ForeFlight to check the weather. Clicking on the “Imagery” tab, I reviewed the “CONUS Weather” section and then read the Boston and New York area TAFs and METARs.

Although my friend had already reviewed the weather, it helped to get my head back in the game. Before arriving at the airport, I took some time to recall some favorite flights when I was PIC, flying friends and family on short flights around New England. Flipping through those memories in my logbook, I realized this would be my first flight since my grandfather passed back in December 2020.

As was our tradition in his final years, I would write him a complete account of every flight so he could enjoy it vicariously. It was a small token of my appreciation for the gift of heavily subsidized flight training he and my grandmother had provided me when I was in high school. I am fortunate he lived a long life in which he shared flying memories, such as taking the F4U Corsair on training flights in the U.S. Navy during World War II.

Arriving at the airport, I had a few minutes to myself after parking at the hangar. Walking out to the airport fence, just as the sun sunk below the tree line, I reached into my jacket pocket to find a special artifact. I closed my hand around my grandfather’s pair of U.S. Navy wings he gave me for safekeeping. I looked out over the quiet evening of airplanes at rest in their tiedowns, a little bit of haze on the horizon lit up the sky in orange and dark pink. It was calm and peaceful, and I had forgotten how moving this scene could be at golden hour. In a few minutes, I would be on the fun side of the fence, getting to fly with a good friend in a gorgeous airplane on a near-perfect VFR evening.

The Preflight

Within a few minutes, my friend arrived, and I was trailing him through the ritual of the preflight and being reminded of how much I used to enjoy the process. Per the checklist, we started at the back of the leftwing, examining the aileron, flaps, and the assorted hardware. As we worked our way through the checklist to the right wing, I placed my hand on the leading edge and realized how much I missed the tactile connection with the airplane prior to flying it. The aircraft in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 and X-Plane 12 are faithfully digital replicas, down to the finest visual details, but there was joy again in physically prepping the machine that would soon take us aloft. Following my friend, I contorted myself below the wing. Assuming a push-up position next to the right tire, he showed me how to check the brake condition and then used the fuel strainer to sump the fuel. Then, we checked the oil, engine cowl, propeller, and the rest of the checklist items.

Satisfied the aircraft was ready to fly, my friend offered me the left seat for the evening. Soon we were taxiing ahead into the calm darkness of the night. No other aircraft were moving at KPYM and the unicom frequency was quiet, save for our radio calls.

Takeoff was exciting. The vibration of the engine at full throttle and acceleration into the climb were physical sensations I definitely missed from my previous years of flight simulation. To address this, I recently added an HF8 Haptic Gaming Pad by Next Level Racing to my home flight sim. The pad sits on top of your flight sim seat and is used across the gaming and simulation world to bring additional sensation to your in-sim experience. Using tunable vibrations within eight different locations on the pad, it cleverly alerts the user to physical changes occurring to the airplane in different phases of flight.

For example, flying my Cape Air-liveried Beechcraft 58 Baron in MSFS2020, there is a satisfying thump felt in the seat pad when the landing gear fully retracts into the fuselage and the doors close. It reminded me of when the gear doors closed in the Piper Arrow I flew a few years ago. The pad also activates when the flaps are lowered into the slipstream and when the aircraft engines are idling below 1,000 rpm. Also, the pad vibrates when rapid pitch changes occur, alerting you to the buildup of G-forces. Without a haptic pad, the dynamic changes to the airplane during flight could only be experienced visually or audibly, leaving out the rest of the body.

Night VFR

Back in the real world, we were cruising through night VFR conditions that couldn’t have been much better. The first major landmark below us was the yellow-lighted outline of the Newport Bridge in Rhode Island, pointing like an arrow due west toward the Connecticut coastline. From the air, we followed the glowing path of vehicle headlights traveling on Interstate Highway 95 South. The lights from cars, neighborhoods, and nearby towns flowed forward, ahead of the airplane, all the way to Manhattan, just barely visible on the horizon. We crossed over Westerly, and my friend confirmed that a small patch of lights off the left wing was Montauk on the most easterly tip of Long Island. Between us and that thin sliver of land were the waters of Long Island Sound, which seemed to reflect almost no light and were the deepest black, exactly like the night sky above. Looking beyond Montauk, the only lights were a few stars and distant airliners making their way to and from the New York City airspace.

Next, we flew over the city of Bridgeport, Connecticut, and were soon turning back toward KPYM, picking up Boston Approach on com 1 and passing over the Class Charlie airspace of nearby Providence, Rhode Island (KPVD). Twelve miles west of KPYM, we started looking for the airport, leaning forward in our belts and peering out into the murky darkness ahead. With only a crescent moon above us, there was just enough haze to make it slightly challenging to find the horizon. The Cirrus SR20’s MFD indicated exactly where the airport should be, so my friend dialed up the correct frequency, hit the push-to-talk switch seven times, and a dazzling blue jewel, made up of hundreds of individual airport lights, burst from the darkness, giving shape to the airport a few miles ahead. Looking out over the nose, I watched how the perspective of the runway changed as we descended to the touchdown point.

Comparing both the real-world landing with some recent night landings from the left seat in my sim, I was very impressed by MSFS2020’s faithful digital representation of that critical phase of flight. On your own home simulator, you can easily adjust and tune your field of view to work best for your specific monitor and hardware setup. A majority of the work can be done through simple adjustments of the slider bars. Tuning the field-of-view and camera settings in your simis time well spent since being able to look around your virtual cockpit easily is critical to improving immersion and having an enjoyable experience.

After landing, we taxied back, shut down, and began the postflight activities of putting the aircraft back in the hangar for the evening. I was grateful for my friend’s invitation to join him and the subsequent reintroduction to GA and night VFR flying. All of my flight sim experiences at home are solo, except for the live communication with volunteer controllers, and a highlight of this flight was getting to catch up with my friend in person. It was all the more special knowing his departure to airline training would be coming this summer, making opportunities to fly together more scarce. After four years away from GA, I realized how much of the flight experience I had missed, both the familiar and unexpected. But being back at the airport, I felt like I was home again—and it felt great.

Hardware Recommendations

Gaming PC: This article was written during my switchover to a new Doghouse Systems gaming PC. John Pryor, Doghouse Systems owner and founder, specifically built the PC to tackle the graphic demands of Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, significantly shortening the load time and allowing its highest graphics settings to be utilized. I have been busy tuning the graphics and switching over the flight controls and avionics. Having been an X-Plane user since 2015, I am learning the finer points of MSFS2020. If you’re in the market for a home flight simulator, look at Doghouse Systems custom-built gaming PCs.

HF8 Haptic Gaming Pad: I am really enjoying the recent addition of this upgrade to my flight sim seat. After installing the driver required to make it run with MSFS2020, I plan to use it on every flight. Even a Class D level simulator can’t replace the physical sensations of flying, but that isn’t the point of the pad. When I add new hardware to my sim, I do so hoping it will provide incremental improvements in the form of additional fun, greater immersion, or a new challenge—and the sensor pad checks those boxes.

This article first appeared in the August 2023/Issue 940 print edition of FLYING.

The post A Midsummer Night’s Flight appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

If you’re beginning to entertain the idea of purchasing your first airplane, you likely have dozens of aircraft reviews and buyer’s guides bookmarked in your browser. You’ve probably learned how important it is to match an airplane’s capabilities to the sort off lying you expect to do most often. And if your daydreaming has evolved into analysis, you might have already begun to narrow your choices to a handful of potential candidates.

In Part 1 of my series featuring Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 initial setup (May 2023/Issue 937), we discussed the importance of making instant views to use all the time when flying. Positioning yourself and creating the proper “captain’s eye point” is crucial in being able to fly like a real pilot would, as well as correct sight positioning and view toward the runway to enable landing like the pros.

• READ MORE: Your First Sim

For some reason, the default viewing height given is always in error, often too low to see properly over the “dashboard” or glareshield. Unless you’re a 5 year old learning to fly, the default viewpoints are always bizarre to me. After 10,000 hours of flying mostly corporate jets in my career, I can promise you that in order to get the best look and “feel,” please use the photo on the next spread to get a sense of the proper view height.

Whether it’s a transport category jet or Cessna 152,the same principles should apply: See enough of the panel to give you the PFD, or basic instruments such as speed, vertical rate, and some engine gauges, but then cut off the rest. You must see more than 50 percent of your view out of the front, as I have shown you in the image. You can have hot keys set for the rest of the panel or external views as we discussed earlier.

This Article First Appeared in FLYING Magazine

If you’re not already a subscriber, what are you waiting for? Subscribe today to get the issue as soon as it is released in either Print or Digital formats.

Subscribe Now

Featured

Once this pilot’s eye is set, the rest is not as important and can be anything you’d like to have in a “scan” or button press corresponding to all the 1-9 viewpoints you locked in before. Often people tell me if they set the view like that, they can’t see the primary gauges that well. I tell them, in real life, especially in jets where everything is bigger and farther apart, we can’t either.

Takeoff in jets is done by the nonflying pilot calling out our V-speeds. Same on landing. We actually have to scan down far away from the view outside to see our speeds and instruments. Thus, the nonflying pilot is again calling out everything we need to hear. I actually don’t see the airspeed indicator much at all in a jet on landing—or takeoff for that matter.

The Keys to It All

Onward to the important “key bindings” you’ll need to perform next in order to run your cockpit efficiently. Now, my key assignments are only an example, but they have worked great for me for more than 20 years in all simulators—and have never changed. Now with more hardware, these key assignments can be brought over to the Honeycomb system or whatever you may have at hand.

Let’s start with your keyboard F key row. I assign F1to 4 as some external lights.

Options/Controls Options/Keyboard/Filter All/SearchBy Name (insert “landing light” for example)/Toggle Landing Lights (then insert your key you want like F1)/Save And Exit

Continuing on, assign the following necessary key commands:

F5 Flaps Up/F6 Flaps Up A Notch/F7 Flaps Down ANotch/F8 Flaps Full Down

Recommended Autopilot Functions

I set up my system to actuate the autopilot using these key settings:

F9: Decrease autopilot reference airspeedF10: Increase autopilot reference airspeed

F11: Decrease autopilot reference altitude

F12: Increase autopilot reference altitude

V: Toggle autopilot V hold

Z: Toggle autopilot master

H: Toggle autopilot heading hold

L: Toggle autopilot flight level change

Ctrl-A: Toggle autopilot approach hold

Right Ctrl+=: Increase autopilot reference Vs

Right Ctrl+-: Decrease autopilot reference Vs

S: Autopilot airspeed hold

T: Arm autothrottle

[: Decrease heading bug

]: Increase heading bug

F: Flight director toggle

I have other controllers using the same commands, as often I may use a combination of keyboard and various controllers depending on if I am at home or on the road. Naturally these are just my personal choices that have worked well over the years for me. Once comfortable setting these up, you can choose anything you want. It will be easy and fast to configure.

Perhaps the most important buttons to assign in the entire program are “pitch trim up and down.” I use two buttons on my joystick for that, simulating the electric trim rocker found in most general aviation and jet aircraft of today.

Whether or not you have a simple or complex set of actual hardware to use, I would recommend attaching an Xbox 360 or Elite controller to the mix. It’s an inexpensive but very effective piece of hardware that in my case becomes a portable autopilot unit. The sim will take any number of hardware pieces running in harmony. This simple device can be used for basic flying, but I chose to disable all the default flight functions on my Xbox controller and have introduced many of the autopilot functions I just spoke about (see sidebar below).

Amateur, But It Works

In addition to either my joystick (THQ Airbus side-stick) or the Honeycomb yoke, I have my landing lights, strobes, nav lights, and taxi lights assigned for quick access. Speed brakes can be assigned to a joystick traditional throttle slider or fancier throttle quadrant unit.

Once you purchase your first set of controllers, MSFS2020 will by default load many of the most common functions, especially if using a name-brand throttle quadrant with panels and buttons built in. The Honeycomb system does just that, with obvious systems, such as landing gear, already mapped properly.

Now that hopefully you have set up your controls and views the way you like them, you are indeed ready to fly and explore the entire world in minute detail. Be sure to be safe, plan, and treat it like it is oh-so-very real.

One last necessary item I’d recommend is the added immersion you’d get by purchasing FSRealistic, available online. It adds the necessary vibrations, noises, head-shaking motions, and so on, that I myself as a real pilot find extremely necessary when flying the sim. By default, MSFS2020 is not that animated, but this add-on takes care of the necessary things I feel that I can not live without in a realistic flight sim environment. Give it a try.

Recommended Autopilot Functions On an Xbox Controller

On my Xbox controller, I have assigned the following:

LEFT FORWARD BUMPER: Flaps up a notch

LEFT STICK PUSH DOWN: Lower flaps a notch

RIGHT FORWARD BUMPER: Reduce throttle (used for engine reversers on jets if you don’t have a throttle system that specifically does this—normal throttle forward from any device will remove reverse thrust)

PLUS PAD UP: Heading hold

PLUS PAD RIGHT: Increase heading bug

PLUS PAD DOWN: Altitude hold

PLUS PAD LEFT: Decrease heading bug

RIGHT STICK PUSH DOWN: Gear toggle

Other buttons I have are dedicated to Autopilot master toggle, Flight director toggle, etc.

This article first appeared in the July 2023/Issue 939 print edition of FLYING.

The post Setting Up Your Sim appeared first on FLYING Magazine.