Home Flight Simulator Setup – 1. The Big Picture

This post is the first of a short series on how to develop your own home flight simulator. It’s for the complete beginner, keeping things simple, not meant to be a comprehensive guide.

I think most people would agree that aviation is fascinating. The idea of flying like a bird or a superhero is the stuff of dreams and childhood fantasies. A fortunate few of us have actually learned to fly an airplane, and now there is a way for anyone to learn to fly–perhaps not in real life, but remarkably close to it in a simulator.

Not too long ago, simulators themselves were also the stuff of dreams and fantasies, but technology has advanced at a great pace, and we now have the ability to develop an advanced flight simulator for home use. It doesn’t have to be an ultra-expensive room-sized setup on hydraulics like they use for pilot training. All you really need is a little tabletop space, a few bucks, and the desire.

This is an early rendition of my home flight simulator.

I really don’t think I need to answer the question of why you would want to fly, IRL or in a simulator–you either do or you don’t. With a simulator, you can learn how to fly many different kinds of aircraft past and present, in the comfort of your own home and with your feet safely on the ground. You can experience the pride of accomplishment as your knowledge and skills improve. You can travel to all corners of the earth and see the world from a different perspective.

Like so many things, building a home flight simulator might seem complicated at first, but you can break it down into parts that are easier to manage, and gradually chip away at the project. A good place to start is to look at the big picture.

Assuming that you already know that these simulators are like computer video games that simulate the act of flying airplanes remarkably well, the first question is: What products are available to me? If you do an internet search for a list of flight simulators, you will get a list of about 10 that are readily available. But let me tell you right now, IMHO, that it really boils down to only two products worth considering: Microsoft Flight Simulator and X-Plane. They are both excellent flight simulators in wide use.

So the next question is: Which one is right for me?

In my experience, since the 1980s, people have fallen into one of two groups: Microsoft PC/Windows users, and Apple Mac users, though many of us are both. And this is perhaps the first thing to consider. Windows PC users have the option of using either Microsoft Flight Simulator (MSFS) or X-Plane (XP) as native applications, while Macs can only use XP as a native app.

Macs can run MSFS, but not easily–you must use Parallels to run a Windows operating system, stream the game using cloud gaming services, or install Windows using Bootcamp. I don’t recommend any of those options because of the huge computer processing demands and the general hassle of trying to adapt a Microsoft-only product to the Apple world. If you prefer to work on Macs, like I do, X-Plane is by far your best option.

Next question: What else distinguishes these products? What sets them apart from each other?

The thing that sets MSFS apart is the quality of the scenery graphics. MSFS uses actual worldwide photography, so the sim is literally photorealistic, which results in a beautiful in-game experience. But you can imagine the amount of data that this kind of imagery requires. Or maybe you can’t. The bottom line is–it won’t fit on your computer. MSFS scenery is housed on remote servers. During a flight, your computer is fed with the scenery that it needs for that flight. So you need a fast computer and a fast internet connection.

X-Plane may not have the photorealistic degree of imagery that MSFS has, but it’s not bad. It’s actually quite good, and with each version, the scenery improves. And there are add-ons for XP, like SimHeaven‘s X-World, that make the scenery even better. (I’ll have more on that in a later post.) X-Plane’s advantage here is that the entire scenery can be downloaded to your computer’s hard drive, so XP doesn’t need to connect with outside servers for scenery. That cuts down on processor use significantly.

What sets XP apart from MSFS is the flight characteristics of the aircraft themselves. This has to do with how these things are programmed. The airplanes in XP behave more like real airplanes than the ones in MSFS. This is a widely held opinion, not just mine. And if you’re after a realistic flight experience, this may well be more important than the quality of the imagery.

Despite the differences, these two programs are so good that you can’t go wrong with either. They have been around for quite a while–MSFS since 1982 and XP since 1995–so they have seen countless refinements over the years and are in active, continuous development.

So the other “big picture” concern is: How powerful of a computer do I need to run a flight simulator? My gut response is, “Get the biggest, fastest, baddest one you can afford!” How fast? Of course, do an internet search for the recommended specifications to run MSFS and XP. Then get one at least that powerful, hopefully more. In general, you’ll need a more powerful computer to run MSFS than to run XP. Why is that? The real question is: What is all that computer power for?

Both MSFS and XP:

Process large amounts of data to “aviate” the airplane (think about all the airplane’s moving parts and their control instruments, engine instruments, flight instruments)

Process large amounts of data to “navigate” the plane (think about moving maps, navigation instruments, autopilot, instrument procedures)

Process large amounts of data to “communicate” (think radios, ATC)

Process large amounts of data for live weather (sky/visibility, clouds, precipitation, wind/gusts, barometric pressure). Both MSFS and XP read real-time weather from the internet

Process large amounts of data for the scenery you are flying over. XP reads it from the hard drive, while MSFS reads it from the internet and therefore requires much more processing power.

And that’s why you need a kick-ass computer. Imagine all that data refreshing a screen 20-50 times per second. You can try running MSFS or XP on a basic computer, but you will quickly discover how that limits the performance of the simulator, as measured in fps (frames per second), and influences the smoothness and enjoyment of the experience.

Having said all that, and with all due respect to the fabulous Microsoft Flight Simulator, I’ll mention that I’m a card-carrying Apple Mac zombie. I run X-Plane on a Mac Studio M1 Max (32 GB RAM, 512 GB memory, 24-core integrated GPU).

So for the following posts on setting up a home flight simulator, I’ll focus on X-Plane on a Mac, though much of it will also apply to MSFS on Windows.

Your assignment: Investigate Microsoft Flight Simulator and X-Plane.

Next post: Downloading and Installing X-Plane

Captain’s Log 9.21.2023 The $100 Burger

The $100 Burger is a romantic notion, a phrase coined by some anxient aviator from ages past, from a time long ago when a hundred dollars seemed like a lot of money. LOL

The joke was that flying for an hour or two, to land at a nearby airport just to buy a hamburger, paying a hundred dollars for the plane, the gas, and the burger when you could buy one at your neighborhood McDonald’s for 25 cents, somehow made sense. Well, it does to an aviator. I paid WAY more for my burger, and it was worth every penny!

For me, this flight had two goals: to land and park at an airport other than my home airport, and to do something fun at that location. The traditional $100 Hamburger flight fit the bill perfectly for this mission.

It took about an hour to fly from KINT (Smith Reynolds in Winston Salem) to KJNX (Johnston Regional in Smithfield, NC.) It was a pleasant IFR flight against a small headwind in slightly hazy skies. On arrival, when I spotted the small airstrip from the air, I was immediately impressed. KJNX is a small, non-towered airport with a single runway that is narrower than what I’m used to, but it appeared perfectly maintained, with distinctly painted lines and a manicured look to the entire field. It was fun to land there, and I craned my neck in all directions, delighting in my new environment, as I taxied to the FBO (fixed base operator) where I parked the plane.

Parked in front of the Johnston Regional Airport FBO

From the tarmac, I saw the Blue Line Aviation flight school in the next building over, and I spied my ultimate destination–the Low and Slow Smokehouse up above it on the third floor.

The Blue Line Aviation facilities and the Low and Slow Smokehouse, with a gorgeous Diamond DA40 NG in the foreground, my dream machine
The Low and Slow Smokehouse on the third floor, with a spectacular view of the runway and airport environment

The pilot’s lounge at the FBO was another nice surprise. It was luxurious! Plenty of amenities for transient visitors like me. Every single person I encountered was happy and helpful. There was no landing fee, even without buying avgas. They directed me to the entrance to the restaurant.

The Low and Slow Smokehouse is a fabulous restaurant, surpassing all my expecations. The food was fantastic, and I especially liked the outside seating, with a spectacular, unobstructed view of the runway and all the airport action.

And here’s the whole point of the story, “the $100 burger!” Actually, it was a BBQ pulled pork sandwich and nachos. Delicious! I enjoyed them at one of the outside tables, surrounded by the airport’s sights and sounds. Heaven!

The $100 Burger. Mission accomplished!

I departed a happy man. Happy, satisfied, and grateful!

The best part of this next video is the takeoff and departure from the airport environment in the first minute. The rest of it is just part of the climb and turn to course for the trip home. But if you find the same joy in it that I do, the video is about 7 minutes long.

Thank you for reading and sharing in this joyful experience!

Next mission: Color Flight #1

Captain’s Log 9.7.2023 The Acid Test

To me, this was the final exam, the acid test. Though I had fulfilled all the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) requirements for an Instrument Rating, passed a rigorous checkride, and was officially an instrument-rated pilot, all my instrument time had been with either an instructor or an examiner riding in the right seat. The next instrument flight would be entirely on my own.

Today was the day–my first solo instrument flight. I had pre-planned my destination and kept a good eye on the weather for days. I picked Roanoke, VA because I could complete a round trip in about 2 hours, the distance qualifying the flight time as cross-country time, and it was an airport I had never flown into (except in my home simulator). I also liked the fact that it is in the mountains, which can have its own challenges. I pored over my various weather apps, and reserved the airplane 2 days ahead of time, hoping the weather would hold out. I wanted a little challenge while staying within my safety limits, and it proved to be just that. On the morning of this flight, the ceiling (cloud base) at Roanoke was high enough, the visibility long enough, and the winds/gusts low enough, all well within my conservative “minimums.” But with a cold front sitting just to our southwest, I knew the forecasted weather could change during the flight, and it did a little.

I filed a flight plan via my ForeFlight app in the early morning, planning ahead for a 9:30 departure, figuring I’d reach Roanoke around 10:15-10:30, allowing for any early fog to clear, even though no fog was forecast. In fact, the ceiling was supposed to be at 9,000 feet. My flight plan called for 7,000, high enough for the mountainous approach while keeping me below the clouds. That was the plan.

I ran through the checklists, fired up the engine, activated my IFR plan, and got my clearance to taxi to the runway. The takeoff and climb were uneventful (the way we like it), while starting communication with the string of ATC (air traffic controllers) who would follow me throughout the flight per IFR routine. I was soon at 7,000 feet and comfortable enroute to Roanoke. But the clouds ahead were not at 9,000 feet as they were predicted. As I neared my destination, the clouds came down to meet me, and I was soon flying blind inside them. I estimate the base was at around 6,800 feet.

Cloud base dropping while approaching Roanoke, VA in the Blue Ridge Mountains
Gradually entering the clouds, leading to a 20-minute white-out
Flying through light rain

Flying “blind” is the very essence of instrument flying. But you’re not really blind. The airplane’s instruments tell you all you need to know about the airplane itself (engine instruments), its attitude (orientation in space), heading, altitude, etc. Flying on an instrument plan guarantees you separation from other aircraft and clearance from obstacles (like mountains) because ATC has you in continuous radar contact. All you have to do is trust the instruments and follow the flight plan or ATC instructions precisely. So, that’s what I did, without anxiety. It was actually quite fun, and that’s when I knew I was a true instrument pilot. #novisibilitynoproblem

Roanoke, VA, with the airport near the center of the image

I negotiated my approach with ATC, and they commanded my initial descent. I was soon clear of clouds, with plenty of visibility below me. I easily spotted the airport while on my downwind leg. ATC continued vectoring me (prescribing headings and altitudes) until I was in position to enter the final approach course. I had the RNAV (GPS) Y Rwy 24 approach already loaded into the Garmin 530 nav-com, and used that and my G5 flight instruments to guide me horizontally and vertically down to the runway. It was a satisfyingly good landing, after which I raised the landing flaps while still rolling on the centerline, applied full power, and took right off again (a touch-and-go) as I had negotiated with ATC. I was soon heading back to Winston Salem.

Most of my flying for the past 2 years has been in pursuit of an instrument rating. During that time, I had to use a view-limiting device that restricted my vision to the dashboard instruments only. In other words, I couldn’t look out the window. So, this flight delivered an extra treat–It was a pure joy to again look out the windows and delight in the kind of views one seldom (if ever) sees. As I grow older, I take none of that for granted.

Areas of rain in the distance, departing Roanoke
Fairy Stone Lake State Park, near Martinsville, VA

Out of the mountains, I was soon out of any significant weather or terrain hazards. It was an easy ride back, and I executed a victorious landing at my home airport. It felt like the final day of the Tour de France, as the peloton circles the Arc de Triomphe, celebrating the end of a long race!

The following is a too-long video of the flight. PLEASE do not see it all; skim through the boring parts. The weather leading up to the landing at Roanoke is the best part. That landing is at about the 46:00 minute mark.

If you are still reading, thank you! I truly appreciate your interest. If you have any questions or comments, please throw them into a comment box.

Next mission: The $100 Burger