From: "Chris Haynes" <chaynes@sunfish.cs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: New simulator: Instrument Pilot
Reply-To: chaynes@cs.indiana.edu
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 11:41:56 -0500

[forwarded by request]

From: Jui Tien <jtg0707@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu>
To: chaynes@sunfish.cs.indiana.edu

In rec.aviation.simulators you write:

>I just got literature on "Instrument Pilot", a new simulator with
>integrated instrument rating instructional software by Precision Training
>Software, Inc. (call 800-452-0465 for a copy).  It has seperate modes that
>will demonstrate, prompt you through, let you practice, and examine you on
>each of the standard instrument procedures.  Requires 386, joystick, mouse,
>hard disk, and color EGA/VGA.  Comes with speach generation hardware to
>simulate communications and all necessary instrument training ground school
>stuff, for $495.  Pricy, but could pay for itself in reduced training
>costs.  (Of course like all PC-based simulators it is not FAA approved, so
>you can't log time on it.)

>Does anyone have any experience with this or any other simulators as
>instrument training aids?  From literature I've collected the Elite
>simulator appears better at basic simulation (to pracice approaches at
>strange airports before you get there, for example), but you're on your own
>trying to integrate it into a training program.  It's also expensive.

>-- 
>     Chris Haynes -- Computer Science Department -- Indiana University
>     Bloomington, IN 47405 -- 812-855-3376 -- FAX 812-855-4829

I tried out a version of ifr sim  (from a firm in Virginia?) before I finally
decided to get a copy of the ELite. My personal impression is that Elite is 
, at least appears to be, smoother as far as graphics go. The hardware 
requirement is( from memory): 386 or above with at least 2 MEg RAM(??),
co-processor is required.
Azuresoft sells an EGA version of the program that runs on a 286/287 with  
640K RAM. The cheaper version appears slower, grainier, and not quite as smooth
as the full blown VGA version. In both versions, there are some bugs/quirks 
that may have more to do with the area/nav package than the program itself.
The smoothness may make a difference, especially when it comes to instrument
updates. After all, that is all you have.

Azuresoft recommends only CH flight stick for controls. No word on pedals.
I can second the opinion on joystick from personal experience. If you decide
to get Elite, I strongly recommend you not buy any hardwares from them. 
For example, the sales rep tried to sell me a CH flight stick for 80+ dollars.
I got a better deal at my local store at half the price.

As far as FAA certification goes, I heard some rumors that Elite has 
been certified in Calif. Can anyone confirm this? I know Azuresoft 
has been trying to get certification for Elite for while now. 
When I want to stay current, I always choose to shoot approaches in real 
airplanes in real IMC, even when I can satisfy some of the requirements in
simulators. Flt sims teach you head work, not IFR flight. Elite is there to 
help me make efficient use of the aircraft time, nothing more. Besides, I 
find flying real airplanes alot more enjoyable than imaginary computer 
airplanes.

If you are interested in getting an ifr sim, I suggest you try them out and see
how you like them. If not, just spend a few dollars and ask the companies to
send you a demo package. I think Elite has been extensively discussed in this 
group's recent summary on flt sim.

Personally, I don't understand why FAA would certified Elite just in Calif.
After all, as you all know, Illinois is the cradle of modern civilization.
Besides, who has ever heard of anyone in Calif. flying ifr?:-))))
(No flames, I can't resist it. It just had to be done.) 
Cheers.
J.T.
12/17/92


Newsgroups: rec.aviation.simulators