New Alaska screenies

[Guest]

Quote.

 

Thanks! However, I don't like that 'in the future' part...

 

A Piper Cub could perfectly be cockpitless because when you fly one for real, specially under adverse weather, the thing you'll do the less will be staring at the instrument panel :-)

 

For cargo missions I believe we can well get a Beaver, but somehow I believe we will not get a multi-engine aircraft, at least for the start... Hum... No problem with that for me... Also, I believe a multi-engine will never be released cockpitless... so, if we get one with Alaska it will most probably be "deluxe" :-)

 

Could perfectly be cockpitless...? It's not about needing the cockpit in order to fly the plane but needing the cockpit in order to really be immersed into the game. 'As real as it gets' and that kind of thing. I want to sit in the pilot seat when I fly virtually. So in my book 'perfectly' and 'cockpitless' will never ever ever ever ever (let me repeat: never ever) match.

 

About the multi-engine with no cockpit... Why do you think that won't happen? If you can fly a warbird without a VC you can also fly a 737 without a VC.

 

Boy, those cockpitless planes really suck big time. Luckily I like the rest of Flight enough to not really be bothered with it... but again, when they release a plane I would really like to have as a basic version, I'd be pretty annoyed.

[jcomm 5,939]

Could perfectly be cockpitless...? It's not about needing the cockpit in order to fly the plane but needing the cockpit in order to really be immersed into the game. 'As real as it gets' and that kind of thing. I want to sit in the pilot seat when I fly virtually. So in my book 'perfectly' and 'cockpitless' will never ever ever ever ever (let me repeat: never ever) match.

 

I can't blame you for that, and I too will appreciate a few "deluxe" aircraft, but, for those really threatening approaches, under adverse weather, even in ELITE I use the mouse wheel to scroll the instrument panel all the way down (partial panel view where you can see the AH and the ASI, at least partially), clearing my view and allowing for appropriate corrections very difficult from inside a VC where perspective and angle of view are all but realistc, unless you have one of those sophisticated multi-monitor setups....

 

Jeroen, if you ever get the chance to work on a PPL, even if just UL (I can't recommend given the fatalities with UL airplanes every year... they've got toy engines... sorry.... rather have none, like in my glider ...), you'll know what I mean... ;-). Even "worse", if you ever get a glider pilot license, you'll know why I feel so confortable with cockpitless airplanes in MS FLIGHT... On a regular flight I scan my instruments twice - before takeoff and at most twice during downwind/final approach :-) Other than that I would appreciate having some sort of HUD like that in FLIGHT...

 

Also, in FLIGHT, more than in any other flight simulator I have used, you can actually learn how to opperate your aircraft under really nasty weather situations, something I could never reproduce to this level of accuracy on any other GA or even Glider sim... Is it the weather model, the flight dynamics, maybe a mix, but the end result is superb! With Alaska I believe we will learn to face scarrying situations with strong/gusty/turbulent winds, wndshear?, microbusrts?, precipitations of all sorts... Whow... get ready, start reading...

[xplanery 250]

Hmm this is what ORBX Alaska would look in FSX I guess. Looks nice, though indeed big part of Alaska must be probably made generic way other than terrain mesh.

[Guest]

Hmm this is what ORBX Alaska would look in FSX I guess.

 

But without the shadows, the awesome lighting and other effects...

 

BTW Orbx regions are also pretty generic, but yes, I also expect big parts to look more or less the same all over.

[poplar 39]

I am so excited about the release of Alaska. Does anyone know if people who have still have access to the Microsoft Flight Beta discussions forum are allowed to post things that are discussed over there here in the Avsim Flight forums?

[DreadMetis 5]

I can't blame you for that, and I too will appreciate a few "deluxe" aircraft, (...)

 

I guess, not having done any real life flights since many years, that regular planes (even gliders !) still all come with some instruments at some point ! I needed an altivariometer and a radio in my glider at least, and this was NO OPTION !

 

What MSF is doing to you is making you believe that NORMAL IS DELUXE...

[RoboRay 126]

A Piper Cub could perfectly be cockpitless because when you fly one for real, specially under adverse weather, the thing you'll do the less will be staring at the instrument panel :-)

 

No, I don't think a cockpitless Piper Cub would be perfect or even desirable. Having an instrument panel doesn't mean you paint over the windows. It's just another source of information; often vital information. Especially in "adverse weather."

 

I've only been up in a Cub once (for spin training, as it had no pesky gyroscopic instruments to tumble) and it didn't have much of a panel, sure. But if I was going to be spending a lot of time in it, I sure wouldn't want all the instruments it did have placarded over.

[Lindy1958 7]

Best thing MS could do for us is make Flight compatible with FSX/FS9. It'll be a while before I even consider Flight; I'm still burning from getting left high and dry by MS bailing on the FSX community! Scenery is like eye candy....nice, but you need a plane if you're going to get up in the thin air! What the heck are we FSX/FS9 enthusiasts to do with the thousands we've invested in add-ons for the sims that MS left us high and dry with??? Perhaps Alaska is the best place for this new sim...way the heck and gone from most simmers...and about as cold as they left us with FSX. Bah....

[jcboliveira 1]

It would be nice to have some AI but weather dynamics is in top of my list. Real weather conditions doesn't appeal to me but dynamic conditions can be a challenge.

[jcomm 5,939]

It would be nice to have some AI but weather dynamics is in top of my list. Real weather conditions doesn't appeal to me but dynamic conditions can be a challenge

 

Fully agree, and I somehow tend to believe Alaska will bring us somtehing new in that area ;-)

[RoboRay 126]

What the heck are we FSX/FS9 enthusiasts to do with the thousands we've invested in add-ons

 

You can keep using them with the product they were designed for.

 

I don't expect to be able to pull out all my old Quake2 mods for use in some current shooter.

[Guest]

Best thing MS could do for us is make Flight compatible with FSX/FS9. It'll be a while before I even consider Flight; I'm still burning from getting left high and dry by MS bailing on the FSX community! Scenery is like eye candy....nice, but you need a plane if you're going to get up in the thin air! What the heck are we FSX/FS9 enthusiasts to do with the thousands we've invested in add-ons for the sims that MS left us high and dry with??? Perhaps Alaska is the best place for this new sim...way the heck and gone from most simmers...and about as cold as they left us with FSX. Bah....

 

You Might Want to Read this Real Close

 

You didn't (yet) repeat yourself so I'll leave it at this but I suggest it's better if you simply enjoy your thousands worth of FSX/FS9 addons!

[staib 1]

Good call Jeroen...

 

I can only speak for myself, of course, but I don't generally read this forum for info about FS9 or for anything other than objective comparisons with any other sim.

 

Sadly I have never been able to justify 'investing thousands' in add-ons, but if I ever did I would surely classify such spending as 'expenditure' rather than kid myself it's an 'investment' ;-)

 

In that spirit I am ready and waiting to expend dollars on Alaska :)

[RoboRay 126]

In that spirit I am ready and waiting to expend dollars on Alaska :)

 

I've already begun. :good:

 

I just completed my collection of charts for Alaska, adding a full set of WACs to the IFR Low charts and AFD I already had. I went with WACs instead of sectionals because 17 sectionals was just a bit too much to buy for a sim, and WACs preserve the important airfield, navaid and terrain information (I don't need the airspace and detailed terrain/landmark annotations for a sim).

 

I've been doing some reading up on flying in Alaska, too, as this will be all new to me.

 

From the State of Alaska website...

Alaska is a very complex aviation environment. Flying safely here requires thorough planning and special attention. When well planned, flying in Alaska presents no particular problems and can be very inspiring. Alaska summer flying weather is generally good with long daylight hours. But expect delays due to adverse weather and marginal VFR conditions. Do not push the weather. Weather reporting points are far apart. Ask for and give pilot reports often. Though VFR flight plans are not required, they are strongly recommended. Much of Alaska is mountainous. The correct entrance to mountain passes can be deceptive. Dead-end box canyons are common. Airports are separated by great distances so fuel planning must be accurate and alternative routes/airports seriously considered. Magnetic variation may be as much as 25 degrees east. Be vigilant in tracking your flight across the ground. Icing conditions are encountered year round. Most of Alaska's runways are gravel. Many are not lighted. Airspace around major population centers can be quite crowded and contain special restrictions and requirements.

 

Sounds fun!

 

"The Raven"

From F. E. Potts' Guide to Bush Flying

He flew past it at 50 knots and half-flaps, checking, and it was as he remembered: 340 feet of narrow, doglegged gravel bar, surrounded by trees and brush in a deep canyon. Along one side the rocky creek from the glacier flowed; once, long ago, during a period of high water, it had created this landing area; eventually, it would destroy it. But for now the gravel bar was still usable, which was fortunate, for it was the only place within miles of where his customer needed to go that an airplane could be set down.

 

In Alaska, you use what you have and are thankful it is available. For here, a true airport is considered almost a decadent luxury.

 

"Do you think it's okay?" his passenger called worriedly from the rear seat of the Super Cub. "Looks pretty short to me."

 

The pilot, looking at the strip, nodded; and, as he did, a picture formed within his mind -- the approach path, with the various "windows" along it, necessary to bring him to the threshold at the speed and altitude necessary for a safe landing. "Yeah," he agreed. "It's short -- and rough. But good enough. We're going in."

 

He made his turn, headed downwind, maintaining his 50 knots at an altitude of about 20 feet above the trees; then, on coming abeam the point where he needed to enter the creekbed and descend below the trees, he turned once again, heading back at an angle. As he reached the edge of the forest, he smoothly came back on the power, carefully maintaining airspeed with attitude (elevator), and began his descent.

 

The creekbed twisted like a snake, its width roughly twice the airplane's wingspan, and the Super Cub followed, going lower and lower, airspeed locked on target, subtle alterations of power controlling descent. Along the edges, in patches of sand, were the tracks of moose and bear, clearly visible to the passenger, and above them a raven circled. Then they were going around the final bend, this one narrower, and as they did, while in the turn, the pilot applied full flaps and slowed to 1.1 Vso, using his sensitivity of feel for flying on the very edge of the stall, a high level of skill in this area of the envelope being one of the primary tools of the bush pilot's trade.

 

In front of them the strip now lay, visible for the first time since they began the approach, the curve of its dogleg obvious, thick brush at its far end. As they neared the threshold and entered ground effect, the pilot raised the nose slightly, while smoothly adding a touch of power, and the Super Cub slowed even more.

 

Then the main gear was crossing the edge of the shallow bank, hardly a foot above its surface, and, as it did, the airplane's tail still over water, the pilot came back on the power and the Super Cub settled, touching gently, its large, soft, high-flotation tires now rolling smoothly over the rocks. Then the flaps were off -- the brakes, as is proper bush technique, having been partially engaged just prior to touchdown -- and they were tracking around the dogleg, coming to an easy stop. In front of them, close, but not too close for comfort, the brush waited, a common hazard in the bush. For, as is often the case with off-airport landing areas in Alaska, this was a one-way strip.

 

And had the raven, still circling above, watching the show, been asked his opinion, he might have nodded his head in approval of the pilot's approach to the landing. For the raven, like all bush experts, was well aware that a careful, precise approach was the foundation of a good landing.

 

I seriously hope Alaska includes some real bush Jobs or Missions with off-airport destinations.

[JayL 0]

Me too. Ferrying hunters out to the literal middle of nowhere and maybe even going out to pick them up, while navigating canyons, would be quite a ride.