VFR...how is it possible in a flight sim?

O

OBIO

Retired SOH Admin
I know that in real life VFR flight requires a pilot to be familiar with the area in which he is flying and to be able to navigate using landmarks of various types....roads, barns, church steeples, rivers, lakes. But how does one fly VFR in FS2004 (or any sim for that matter). How does on fly from Helena, Montana to Portland, Oregon in a DC-4 under VFR rules? What the heck do you use to navigate by?

Just a question that popped into my head from way out in left field.

OBIO
 
Well, a lot of the visual stuff you'd use as landmarks are present in FS9, or can be.

If you use higher resolution than stock terrain mesh, you can recognize hills and mountain peaks by their detailed shape.

If you use corrected water like FREEflow New England, FREEflow Florida, FREEflow Bermuda, American Data or Ultimate Terrain, the rivers, streams and lakes are quite accurate and recognizable.

If you use accurized roads like USA Roads or Ultimate Terrain, you can follow anything from major roads down to fire trails in the forests with just a road map, or your knowledge of your local area.

FSGenesis' USA Landclass Project does an amazing job of correcting the world of FS9. In my local area it gets down to clusters of individual small buildings along country roads, and I suppose it does the same for the rest of the country.

I have FREEflow New England (and the others), USA Roads, USA Landclass American Data bridges and some other tings (can't recall the details), and I can fly VFR and navigate by pilotage (i.e., visual contact with the ground) around southern New England just as easily as I did in the real world back in my real aviating days.
 
I suspect it's not as easy as real life. My short test hop is from KGSO Rwy 5 to W88 Rwy 9. I know that as soo as I'm up I need to look over to the right and find the pond that's beside W88. Anything longer and I generally use the GPS to get me close enough that I can see the airport. Another trick would be to acquire some city scenery packs. I have one for Greensboro NC's downtown. It's easily visible from a distance, and if I knew the relative bearing of a given airport from that, then I could fly over that scenery, then turn to the heading I need to get to where I'm going.

Also, there's the alternate definition of IFR: "I Follow Roads." I don't have it, but Raimondo Taburet has a three-part download over at Flightsim. Search Taburet Roads in the FS2004 Scenery section and sort by downloads. The three files will be at the top of the list.
 
Even with the default scenery, the road/river/landmark layout in FS9 (and even FS2002) is fairly accurate. The interstate and other major highways are there. Radio tower locations might vary but many of the ones that are listed on US sectionals are reasonably close to where they are in real life.
It's usually good enough to use a roadmap and follow the roads to get from one field to another.

The terrain mesh can vary and isn't nearly as detailed, but if you've got a rough idea of what your area looks like from the air you should be able to recognize the less-detailed FS rendition.

The one thing that bugs me about navigating VFR in FS9 (in my area, the upper midwest US) is that most of the small towns aren't "landclassed" correctly so they're just a collection of autogen trees instead of a collection of autogen buildings. FS2002 was better in this aspect...there were at least buildings located at most of the small towns even if the street layouts or other more detailed landmarks were just generic.

Add-ons like the ones that Mick suggest will help correct many of these little inaccuracy niggles.
 
i've gone from cytz to kilg so many times i can do it vfr, but it's mostly me maintaining a heading until i can see the delaware river, then figuring out where i am by sight at that point and proceeding from there.
 
the only problem in FS9(orX) is that the scale looks off when looking around. Houses are too big, trees are too big, the terrain textures look too big/blurry. And as a result, your sense of environmental awareness is a bit off....

you can still use FS9's terrain for VFR flying, but i do need to check the instruments for altitude and heading all the time. Where as in real life, i like to line up a distinct object (such as a hill-top, a radio tower, etc.) w/ the front of the nose (in a C172), and that alone allows me to hold altitude and heading (and of course i do check my gauges often)....

-feng
 
I suppose for those of us living in either England or Wales, we have been fortunate that we have had VFR photographic scenery available for both countries. What with the various addons, including trees, buildings, masts, wind farms etc etc, it does create a very lifelike environment.

I myself have never used the GPS in the sim, as find it more satisfying to fly from A to B, armed just with a map, the compass and a watch. That is the way that I was taught and for some reason, I cant think of any other way to fly. Brings out the sense of adventure in a way and normally most of the aeroplanes that I fly in the sim, have very basic panels, which reflect on my experiences in real life.

A month ago, myself and three friends took a Broussard on a twelve day trip touring Belgium and France and the GPS stayed at home.

Best wishes,

Martin
 
OBIO said:
I know that in real life VFR flight requires a pilot to be familiar with the area in which he is flying and to be able to navigate using landmarks of various types....roads, [LINESTRIKE]barns,[/LINESTRIKE] [LINESTRIKE]church steeples[/LINESTRIKE], rivers, lakes. But how does one fly VFR in FS2004 (or any sim for that matter). How does on fly from Helena, Montana to Portland, Oregon in a DC-4 under VFR rules? What the heck do you use to navigate by?

Just a question that popped into my head from way out in left field.

OBIO
Click to expand...

I learned to fly 40 years ago, have taught ground school, been involved in several instances of helping 'lost' pilots get 'found' so I'll toss in a few cents worth.

First of all, though, VFR nav doesn't normally involve small man-made structures (things like the Eiffel Tower or Hoover Dam are not small) because they get torn down, painted, renovated (and most barns, shopping malls, etc look the same unless it's in your home town) and are thus unreliable.

Second, there's a tendency for FS pilots to think "here to there, set GPS and autopilot, GO" which is fine when the biggest task is staying airborne. However, once you've mastered 'flight' the next step is to learn navigation (not autopilot operation). It's a wonderful science with a bit of magic added in and can bring a whole new experience to the sim.

That's not to say you can't use the GPS - just think of it as a moving map and, in spite of the cynics, it's quite good for VFR map-reading. However, the fun is doing it the 'real way' and besides, GPS isn't allowed on your flight test. :icon_lol:

I was going to go through the steps here but it would take several posts or one long, tedious one so I'll put it in a html/doc format and post it in a bit.

A few comments though... the default mesh and maps are not as bad as they first seem; even a state, Rand McNally or Google road/terrain map can do wonders; real VFR nav is not super-precise in the beginning but can be with practice; even at higher altitudes it's quite feasible in FS if the wx is decent; think in smaller steps, not one long route in one 'visualization'.


Oh yeah.. VFR navigation does not imply or require you to follow every twist and turn of highways, rivers, mountains. In OBIO's quest he's flying a DC-4 capable of going direct (over the mountains) and in fact that's the first thing to learn.. how to plot a course, identify progress points, how to check the time and drift to allow for wind.

I'll be back...

Rob
 
I use the Rand McNally Atlas as well often in FS to go by. Also sometimes I'll purchase a flight chart and use that as well.

You can find things like lakes, mountains, and interstates that are fairly accurate in FS, as like Mopar_Mike said. You can follow the freeways (like the pilots did in the old days) to navigate by. Finding particular lakes is a good way of navigating also.

If you are doing a journey that has VOR stations in that 'time era', then you can easliy triangulate your position with a dual set of VOR gauges. Checking angles when flying between two VOR stations will quickly show you where you are on a chart or roadmap.


Fun stuff, dead reckoning and going by landmarks.. Love it....
 
I'm just starting this, but I feel that actually flying visual is surprisingly easy.
I'm currently trying to do the MacRobertson race to Melbourne by visual flying only.
The first three legs turned out so easy (though there was some bad visibility in france) that I removed the ADF from the panel yesterday.

Big rivers are easiest to follow (ocean shorelines are easier still of course), then in decreasing order of preference railways, double lane motorways. Most of these will be pretty accurate even with the default scenery.
With a LOD9 (76m) mesh topography gets very realistic, so navigating in mountains becomes pretty easy as well.
Big towns are also likely to be present, even with default scenery, but I would use them just for back-up to confirm position, or to keep track of position during the flight.
Otherwise fly a course to hit a line feature (big river, railroad, mutorway, mountain ridge, shore, ...) to the side of a landmark, and follow the line feature to the landmark (river bend, airport, road/railway crossing, ...). See fsaviator's propliner tutorial at Calclassics, Chapter 1A - Phase 1.

You may want to precompute a detailed flight plan with ETE/course from waypoint to waypoint, and continuously keep track of position (finger on the map), compare ATE to ETE.
I use a world atlas for general planning (Major rivers/roads/railways/mountains). Love Tim Arnot's excellent Plan-G flight plan and map for working out the details.

I'll send you a postcard if ever I manage to get to Melbourne. :d

PS: A quick plan from Helena to Portland:
From Helena head east along 12 (mountain pass) to Hwy 90. 247° 35nm
Follow N through Missoula to characteristic bend to the North. 86 nm
Head by DR WSW to Dworshak reservoir (look out for the railway line that runs Orofino - Pierce in case you've drifted too far south.) 237° 53 nm
Follow the snake river to the Columbia at Kennewick. Approx 150 nm
Follow Columbia river through the Columbia river gorge to Portland. Approx. 158 nm
KPDX is easy to identify by some islands in the river/roadbridge.
Easy :icon_lol:
 
My first VFR flight without GPS was from my local airport to St Louis. Easy enough. Took off from the airport (KTGC) and followed the Trenton - Milan highway west to Trenton. Then US 45W to Dyer. Then NW from Dyer crosscountry to Reelfoot Lake. Once the lake was found, the Mississippi River was in sight and I just followed it north to St Louis. Actually it would have been a lot easier to just head west from the airport till I hit the Mississippi and then go north. But I was having fun sightseeing the local area.

I did use the map on the way back. Going up was just a matter of looking for the Arch on the west bank of the river in a big town. Coming back was a bit more difficult to make sure I got the right lake at Reelfoot.
 
I have UTX and all the UTs for FS9. Around home, anywhere in the NC, VA area, I can fly IFR by sight. In unfamiliar territory, I usually start by plotting a flight plan in Google Earth. I have my Rand McNally handy for the US also, that's IFM, (I Follow Maps) :icon_lol:.

All of my leisure flights are IFR, wouldn't consider any other way. Flew to SoBo (South Boston) this morning early under a 1200-ft. ceiling. Gott lower than that toward Tuck! But I knew where I was by the small lakes, rivers and roads from UTX. Sweetness, it might be a glorified cartoon, but it makes my day! :icon29:

Caz

nc1776_5.jpg


nc1776_6.jpg


nc1776_vc.jpg


nc1776_vc2.jpg
 
I use towns, rivers, lakes, mountain range, communications towers work fairly well if you can see them. I use each one suspecting that they could very easily not be accurate. However the very basic most used method I use is compass direction traveled and a rough perception of time traveled.

For short trips I use mostly compass direction. Fro longer distances I use compass direction and percieved time and the closer I get to the long distance destination I begin to pay closer attention to landmarks.

For instance, If I was to leave out of Raliegh, N.C. and was flying to Chicago, Ill. I would chart the heading, fly that heading, and figure a rough time it would take for the trip. Since I trust the compass as well as the sun for very rough indication of direction and a sense of time such as a clock, I usually do not use minute by minute ground landmarks for navigation until I get about a 1/3 of the way from the destination. However the landmark observance does vary to more use some times. I like to rely mostly on liquid compass and time enroute. However the landmarks help to minimize the possibility of getting lost, which can happen.
 
If I may ask, what are the add ons that produce so many trees and the cars on roads? I have UT only which was a big improvement but still have scenery that looks like it has mange, and certainly no cars.
 
Two things to throw in here...

1. VFR does not mean that you may not use a VOR or NDB to keep you heading in the right direction and to cross check that you are still on your planned route. The real difference between VFR and IFR is really that you keep your airplane shiny side up by either looking out the window or by trusting your gauges.

Ded or Dead Reckoning navigation is another thing all together of course.

2. If you look at Sectional or Terminal area charts and then the world you see in the sim....it is actually pretty darn close even in default form. So that if you either have some of those in paper form (if you have a friendly FBO operator near home you can ask for expired ones for FS use since they usually only send the Face-page back if unsold) ,or support your local airport and FBO and buy a few for the area you fly in most.
And then there are a few sites where you can look at them online.

Typically I use a combination of these two both in the sim and in real life....even if my Saratoga has a very nice GNS530, since I never want to be one of those pilots that has to ask ATC for help finding myself if the electrons for some reason decide to take a vacation 3 hours into a 6 hour flight :icon_lol:

:ernae:
Stefan
 
I also find that with UT FS9 is surprisingly accurate, and VFR navigation using charts is usually not difficult. Navigating by roads, rivers, railroads and powerline is easiest. Of course there are always glitches in FS9 and/or UT data, and you'll find places where there's supposed to be a road or a river but isn't. That's really annoying. :banghead:

Navigating solely by terrain features can be surprisingly difficult, or at least it is to me. What appears very clearly as a valley or mountain on the chart usually looks considerably less distinct out the cockpit window. I'm getting better at it with practice, but I still often have trouble trying to figure out which of those two valleys coming up on the right is the one I'm supposed to turn into.

Skyvector.com is one of my favorite and most used sites. It has real aeronautical VFR charts--not just topographical or road maps--covering the entire U.S., including Alaska. It gives you current weather and complete airport information, and you can create a flight plan to follow. Most of the time I find the scenery in FS to be remarkably close to the real thing, and navigating using only the charts is not difficult. I try not to use the GPS unless I'm pretty sure I've gotten myself lost. :mixedsmi:

Unfortunately the U.S. seems to be the only country where aeronautical charts are considered to be in the public domain. For flying VFR in Canada I have to settle for topographical maps, but even those work pretty well. Here's a couple of site I use for those...

http://atlas.nrcan.gc.ca/site/english/maps/topo/map

http://www.geogratis.cgdi.gc.ca/geogratis/en/product/search.do?id=34325

The second site is trickier to figure out how to use, but the charts of a much higher quality than the first site. The charts are in PDF format and intended to be downloaded rather than viewed on the site itself.
 
Additional considerations pertinent to VFR navigation:

Over long distances you need to consider that wind speed and wind direction matters if you are using basic liquid compass for coarse and heading and some sense of time enroute to your destination. A 3 hr trip with a direct cross wind at 12 mph at 90 degrees to the flight path could put you downwind off your coarse to your destination by 36 miles in a three hour flight regardless of aircraft speed.

Thus you need to know how to crab the aircraft in flight to keep your true coarse to correct for the wind speed and direction. If you are lucky and have a straight tail wind you don't have to crab to keep true coarse, plus it gives you extra ground speed that enables you to save fuel.

Tail wind = good. No crab necessary to keep true coarse, increases ground speed, decreases enroute time.

Head wind = bad. No crab necessary to keep true coarse, decreases ground speed, increases enroute time.

Cross wind = neutral on ground speed help or hurt but you have to adjust crab to maintain your true coarse.

What is crab?
Think of a flowing river. You are in a boat and you need to get straight directly across to the other side. That would be your true coarse. Think of the river as the air flow. With the river you already know which direction it is flowing as it will be like a direct 90 degree crosswind. The "speed" of the flow of the river matters so you can determine how much crab you need to crank in to get straight to the other side.

But flying in an airplane, the wind direction can, come from any direction depending on weather conditions for the area you are flying in. So while flying you must find out the wind direction and wind speed to take into consideration if you are flying long routes. But when you crab to maintain your true coarse you crab the plane much like in the boat crossing the river. It looks like you are flying at an angle in relation to your true coarse.

When I take off and gaining some altitude I mainly point the nose of the aircraft to the compass heading of the true coarse to my destination. I pick out a visual landmark way ahead using the compass and the visual referense of the nose of the plane, and then I that visually establishes the visual true coarse along the ground that should take me to my destination. Then if there is a cross wind I set in crab angle of the aircraft so that I maintain that the flight path of the aircraft across the ground so that it travels the true coarse pathway to the distant landmark without slipping off upwind of the path nor down wind of it. The plane looks to be flying somewhat sideways. When you have this established it is setup. Now look at the compass and read it. This is your true heading and you keep flying this true heading. It is a basic seat of the pants set up and only takes the compass, a visual land mark in the distance ahead, and seconds to establish it. Time to time during the trip you make your adjustments as needed by pointing the nose of the aircraft to the "True coarse" again, pick out a new distant landmark and then re-establish crab and keep the new "True heading. Close attention is needed to frequently maintain your compass heading as well as what the destination "True coarse" is.

And of coarse all the while you monitor your map if you have one and visual land marks along your route. All part of VFR navigation and dead reckoning. I reckon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top