46 minutes ago, Michael Moe said:

PS! do you need to un-install first ?

You mean the passage from the ported to the native Comanche version? I didn't have it installed since 1 month or 2, then I did a clean install of the native version.

9 hours ago, Claudius_ said:

Hoping that this "new" Comanche FS24 dev, will improve the flight model,

Honest question: What’s wrong with the flight model…?

20 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Honest question: What’s wrong with the flight model…?

Ha ha properly a troll right ? A2A Comanche is the finest to this day if you ask me

 

Michael Moe 

7 hours ago, Claudius_ said:

I know that some old GA airplanes are getting retrofitted with some modern GPS toys, 

GPS is literally it necessity, not a toy.  VOR only equipped GA don't get you far in instrument conditions. Not to say you will have a tough time navigation in controlled airspace

48 minutes ago, UrgentSiesta said:

Honest question: What’s wrong with the flight model…?

read my previous messages.

Just now, sd_flyer said:

GPS is literally it necessity, not a toy.  VOR only equipped GA don't get you far in instrument conditions. Not to say you will have a tough time navigation in controlled airspace

Not to mention that the GPS toys are often more expensive than the airplane itself, where do you think to go with a not pressurized, no turbo and no antiice airplane? My trips with the Comanche are about 120/80nm range at 3000/8000ft. If considering to go in France from Italy, crossing the Alps is a real challenge, GPS toys or not.

5 hours ago, JYW said:

PS... As others have said, that was a silly comment to suggest that GA flyers these days use VOR-VOR navigation. 🙂 As a real world pilot, I have never seen a fellow GA pilot navigating in this way in 10 years.  By far the most common method of VFR navigation I see, is with a tablet in the cockpit (not integrated into the plane and not interfaced with other avionics or autopilot), that uses one of the amazing VFR moving map softwares;  primarily Sky Demon or ForeFlight.    Perhaps what you meant was flying the Comache as they did back in the 50s, although back then, VOR was new, upcoming and rare.  NDBs were king in the 1950s.

I did my PPL training in 2016, after turning 60 btw, you certainly do have to know how VOR's work, I believe the written will have questions, and yes my instructor actually had me use it during flight once or twice, but it certainly did NOT come up at all in the actual practical/flight exam. 

When ADS/B was mandated I had a Garman 375 put into my Cherokee, this is not quite as big or fancy as the 650 or 750 but its still a color display. As you say, my mode was to have Foreflight on my iPad, which actually communicated with the Garmin, that gave me a BIG display of the surrounding airspace. Was more than enough.

As for SID/STARs, if you look, most of them disallow a "non turbojet" anyway 🙂 

I never completed IFR training, it just wasn't practical for my flying, which was completely for personal enjoyment anyway. But for "situational awareness" as the FAA calls it, having modern aviations makes life SO much easier.

Happy Holidays!

 

17 minutes ago, jfv said:

having modern aviations makes life SO much easier.

too much easier?

21 minutes ago, Claudius_ said:

Not to mention that the GPS toys are often more expensive than the airplane itself, where do you think to go with a not pressurized, no turbo and no antiice airplane? 

GPS are not as expensive as airplane. GPS is a must for instrument flying nowadays and not only. Where do I think to go with none pressurized and none turbo airplane. Is that a bad joke?

32 minutes ago, Claudius_ said:

Not to mention that the GPS toys are often more expensive than the airplane itself, where do you think to go with a not pressurized, no turbo and no antiice airplane? My trips with the Comanche are about 120/80nm range at 3000/8000ft. If considering to go in France from Italy, crossing the Alps is a real challenge, GPS toys or not.

Perhaps in Europe it's different... in the USA, GPS is almost a must have for busy/complex airspace during IFR flights.  And also regardless of airspace, a GPS (especially one with WAAS) opens up the possibility of landing at smaller airports during LIFR minimums.  Previously one would have to land at a larger airport with an localizer antenna, (even an ILS if the minimums are low).  In the USA with WAAS, a LPV approach can get you down to 200 ft agl in some airports.  Just as good as an ILS.  Most smaller USA airports do NOT have an ILS, or even a VOR approach anymore.  NDB approaches are almost all gone here.

I had a Loran in my C177 back in the 80's before GPS. All IFR nav back then was VOR NDB in GA aircraft. But I always used Loran as a help it was coupled into my AP as well.

As soon as GPS came out that was retrofitted. Much better and soon it became IFR certified unlike Loran.

Those were the days...

@Claudius_ I will shoot a VOR RY9 full procedure (with green needles even) at my local airport, in solidarity LOL

(I even came off the map page, charts on my 2nd monitor, no georeferencing - VOR ID'd on the GTNxi- no morse required)

 

10 minutes ago, 177B said:

Those were the days...

That looks very similar to what I learned on.  Is that LORAN?  Mine wasn't that dated... it was a KLN90B though.

1 minute ago, ryanbatc said:

That looks very similar to what I learned on.  Is that LORAN?  Mine wasn't that dated... it was a KLN90B though.

Yes as posted above, I used Loran a lot flying IFR until GPS came out. I used Loran hooked to auto pilot to fly VOR-VOR or to intersections. Just as backup to VOR DME and ADF. Made work load a lot easier as single pilot IFR over mountains etc.

I also flew NDB approach into B20, now KIZG, using Loran as main guide, but of course monitoring ADF full time. Way more accurate that way. I always figured Loran at my local airport was within 100' we are close to the Maine Coast here, so Loran coverage was really good.

Now the only approach to KIZG is RNAV. A big improvement and much easier to fly.