David It sounds like you certainly got your money's worth from the test flight.
About the vertigo thing: I used to think I had a fear of heights, but I could never work out why that didn't affect me when flying (as a passenger that is - I've never flown a plane). I've finally realised that rather than having a fear of heights, I actually have a fear of falling, which really isn't the same thing. I can be as high as you like, but if I feel I'm in a secure environment, the height doesn't bother me. I mention this because it may be relevant to the cramped cockpit/small plane thing. You don't really say why you think a larger plane might be better, but it could be related to my experience. I find it difficult to imagine myself flying an open-frame microlite, whereas a large aircraft would pose no problems. Towards the smaller end of the scale, there might be a problem - I don't know, but maybe that's what you experienced. Regardless of whether you decide to continue flying for real, your report highlights one positive thing: Flight simulation can be a very real alternative to real flying, rather than a substitute. I remember reading about a guy in Germany (I think) who had build a multi-screen cockpit for himself. On his web site he explained that for him flight simulation was not a substitute for the real thing - he loves to fly through the Alpine mountains and valleys, and if he did this in real life he would most likely end up dead. He didn't have the least inclination to do it for real. Thanks for that (literally) gripping report. Mally ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Megginson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "FlightGear Development" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 11:57 AM Subject: [Flightgear-devel] My First Flight > Although I've said before that I wouldn't do it, I went up today for a > CA$45.00 (US$30.00) introductory flight in a 100HP Cessna 150 at the > Ottawa Flying Club at CYOW (there's a separate north field for small > aircraft so that we don't have to worry about wake turbulence from all > the big jets). My instructor was younger than I am but had 1,600 > hours flying experience -- I think this is the first time I've ever > been formally instructed in anything by a younger person. > > After reading over the log book then walking around the plane, > checking the surface movements, examining fuel samples, checking the > oil level, etc. etc., we plugged in our headsets, climbed in, and sat > down. The interior of a C150 is very small, and the instructor > suggested that I leave the door open until I had my shoulder strap > fully fastened or I wouldn't have room to do it. He was right -- it > made economy class on a commercial aircraft seem roomy by comparison. > > I had expected that in an introductory flight the instructor would fly > to altitude, take me to the practice area, then let me take the yoke > for a few minutes and maybe try a few turns. In fact, he put me in > the pilot's seat immediately, and after we ran the checklist, he had > me fire up the engine and (after we listened to ATIS and he radioed > for clearance for our flight) asked me to taxi. Even though I *knew* > to use the rudder pedals, he still caught me trying to steer with the > yoke once, out of pure reflex (it doesn't matter how much you practice > at home with the computer -- you still want to steer a moving vehicle > with a wheel). > > In FlightGear, neither JSBSim (either before and after my patch of > yesterday) nor YASim has taxiing quite right from my limited > experience. On the C150, at least, the nosewheel has more turning > authority than JSBSim used to allow it, but not so much as I gave it > yesterday with my patch (or YASim gives it) -- you really have to use > the toe brake a little in most turns. Unfortunately, JSBSim > pretty-much stops all forward movement with even a little differential > braking, while the real C150 keeps on moving forward. > > I was pretty clunky taxiing at first, but it's a small plane and I got > the hang of the steering and differential braking fairly fast, at > least in time to hold short for the runway. We watched one of the > club's C172s land, then the instructor radioed the tower and got > clearance, and I taxied out onto runway 22 and lined up (well, pretty > close) with the centreline. Winds were light and variable. > > He simply told me to push the throttle all the way in and to steer > only with the rudder pedals (no brakes), then, after a few seconds, he > told me to pull back on the yoke. I was prepared for a heavy > propeller effect and probably overcompensated with right rudder when > we lifted off; actually, I didn't notice any p-effect at all, period > (I had my feet on the rudder pedals, so I would have noticed them > moving if the instructor were compensating for me). Obviously, this > was a small aircraft with a much weaker engine than the C172R's 160HP > IO360, but I'm willing to guess that both JSBSim and (to a lesser > extent) YASim are *way* overdoing it with their propeller effects on > takeoff. > > One other reason for the absence of noticable propeller effects might > be the fact that I did a very shallow climb (fortunately, there are no > significant obstacles after the runway). Things were happening far > too fast -- I had had no idea that I would be flying the plane right > at the start -- and I found it very hard psychologically to keep the > nose up, since it covered my forward view. Imagine driving fast down > the highway with the front of the windshield entirely covered with > snow and ice, so that you can see only out the side windows -- that's > what it's like climbing in an airplane. It took me a long time to get > to 2000ft (the airport is around 335ft), but the instructor was > patient. He gave me a new ground reference to aim for, and I turned > the plane right and tried to hold 2000ft (+/-10%, in the event). > > Scanning the instruments in a C150 is *not* like watching the > instruments on the screen of a PC simulator, were everything's visible > in the same focal plane. I was sitting very close to the panel and > above it, so even checking the airspeed indicator or tachometer (way > over on the copilot's side) required a head movement and eye > refocussing, as well as a slight pupil adjustment from the sunny > exterior to the darker interior. It's not like scanning the > speedometer and gas gauge in a car either, where you're sitting low > and further back -- I'd say it's about as disruptive as looking down > at the car radio. It's probably easy for an experienced pilot, but I, > with only a few minutes' flying experience, growing vertigo from the > aircraft's motion, and a total inability to read motion cues, was very > unwilling to tear my eyes away from the outside. The best way to > similate this in FlightGear, I think, is to set up the view so that > you have to use the mouse to tilt the view down to the panel and then > back again -- that seems like a good equivalent of the physical effort > of scanning instruments, at least for a first-time flier. > > We did another right turn at the Queensway, the major east/west > expressway across Ottawa, and the instructor told me to keep to the > south side. The parliament buildings are a few km to the north of the > Queensway (the airport is to the south), so all of downtown north of > the Queensway has been a no-fly zone since 11 September. I noticed > that the ball on the turn coordinator pretty-much stayed centered no > matter what I did (again, my feet were on the rudder pedals, so I > would have felt the instructor moving them for me). What the > instructor *was* doing, besides radio work and navigation, was > scanning for traffic (I was too scared to take my eyes off front > anyway) and trying to quietly adjust the trim wheel for me, though he > couldn't tell what pressure I was feeling from the yoke so it wasn't > very effective. In fact, when I was flying 200ft too high and he > tried to trim us down, I kept compensating unconsiously to hold the > nose up. > > I followed the highway for a couple of minutes, past my own > neighbourhood. The instructor offered to take the controls so that I > could take some pictures with the digital camera I had brought along, > but I said I didn't mind keeping flying. The truth was that I was > terrified to let go of the yoke and was feeling more and more motion > sick (fortunately, I had arrived on a mostly empty stomach). He gave > me a new ground reference, a smokestack that just happened to be lined > up with runway 22, and once I passed it I turned right, pointed the > plane at the runway, and began a descent (I lost 200ft in the turn > despite my best efforts, so I had a bit of a headstart). The > instructor radioed the tower and then took control of the plane and > brought it down -- we hit the runway at a very slight crab, so there > was a snap as the wheels straightened us out. As soon as the plane > was slowed down, he gave it back to me to taxi back to the flying club > (a long taxi, since the club is near the other end of the runway). I > did much better this time, and managed to hold the yellow line even > around the turns. The rule is to taxi with the engine at 1000 RPM, > sometimes going up to 1200 RPM just to get started -- he said that a > C172 taxis around 900 RPM because of the more powerful engine. > > When we got to parking, the instructor took over again and found us a > parking place on the grass, across the taxiway from the club. We ran > through the post-flight checklist and shut down the plane, but didn't > tie down because it would be going right back up again with someone > else. > > Will I do it again, and pursue a private pilot's license? I don't > know. One problem was that it wasn't fun or exciting really -- during > the flight, I felt like I was just driving a very difficult car around > the city, and being in the air didn't seem a lot different than being > on the ground except that I got much more motion sick and felt an > enormous (almost crushing) weight of responsibility being at the > controls, even with the instructor ready to take over. > > The motion sickness was a big problem -- I was still experiencing > vertigo 6 hours after the flight, and feel slightly unsteady even this > morning even after a good night's sleep. We hit rough air twice, but > I don't think that was the main reason. The vertigo didn't interfere > with my ability to fly (I knew it was there, but was able to focus > through it), but it hit hard once I was on the ground and out of the > plane, and even harder once I had driven home. Right after the > flight, I was thinking I might not want to go up again; and hour > after, I was sure I wouldn't. > > By late yesterday evening, however, I was thinking of everything that > I could do better if I had one more try. I'd try to relax enough to > reach for the trim wheel; I'd make sure I held a steady climb after > takeoff; I'd use a looser grip on the yoke; etc. > > I still feel disappointed that I felt no excitement at all from > actually being in the air, though (I enjoyed taxiing and the preflight > more, if you can believe it) -- I was like a kid looking forward to > Christmas and then getting nothing but socks. Will the excitement > come when I'm more relaxed and confident, or is it simply not for me? > I've never enjoyed driving or owning cars -- they are a necessary evil > for me, but nothing more -- so perhaps I'm just the wrong personality > type. Learning a difficult skill does interest me, though, and that's > the main point in favour of going back. I also enjoy navigation, so > perhaps when I can fly cross-country, it will be worth it. > > I'm going to think things over and perhaps try one proper lesson in a > bigger plane (like a C172) -- if I'm less crowded, the vertigo might > not be so bad, though lessons will be slightly more expensive. Right > now, I'd say that there's a 55% chance I won't continue flying but I > might change my mind over the next few weeks. Ground school starts in > late April, so I have some time to decide. > > > All the best, > > > David > > -- > David Megginson > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel > _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
