michal

It is very good but I would give Udvar-Hazy Air & Space Museum a slight edge.

I purchased PC in October 2014, came with OEM Win 7 (because this is what I wanted) and I never had problem that some other OS was shoved down my throat. Never got any prompts, solicitation, suggestion, etc to upgrade.

This is after AvHerald: On May 20th 2016 The Aviation Herald received information from three independent channels, that ACARS (Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System) messages with following content were received from the aircraft: 00:26Z 3044 ANTI ICE R WINDOW 00:26Z 561200 R SLIDING WINDOW SENSOR 00:26Z 2600 SMOKE LAVATORY SMOKE 00:27Z 2600 AVIONICS SMOKE 00:28Z 561100 R FIXED WINDOW SENSOR 00:29Z 2200 AUTO FLT FCU 2 FAULT 00:29Z 2700 F/CTL SEC 3 FAULT no further ACARS messages were received Clearly at this point absolutely nothing could be said whether it is terrorist related or not. It could easily go either way. http://avherald.com/h?article=4987fb09&opt=7168

.. what information? There is no information besides that flight is missing. EgyptAir 990 also 'disappeared' in 1999 an no 'in flight' beak up was involved. So did Egyptian Flash Air 604- no in-flight beak-up. Many flights disappeared one way or another with no in-flight break-up. Actually in-flight break-up is pretty rare.

"catastrophic" absolutely doesn't have to imply "inflight breakup". Yes, most likely it was a catastrophic event of some kind but it is impossible to say anything more.

Boeing delivered over 400 of them so it shouldn't be a surprise.

Please spare me your propaganda ...

I beg to differ.

Oh my God, the same idiotic Al Jazeera 787-video topic returning after two years? I can't believe it. Al Jazeera is as good as Russia Today (RT).

This aircraft is actually better known under the name of Swearingen - from the name of it's original designer. SJ30 had a very painful birth including a deadly crash during certification (due to errors in design), company went bankrupt more than once, changed ownership, etc. This is probably a prime example how challenging and costly is process of developing and certifying a new jet but the aircraft has some amazing performance capabilities. I don't know how well it sells though.

AHRS relies on much more than magnetic flux, it is a tiny microelectromechanical (MEMS) package that contains gyros, accelerometers, etc. If flux data is lost you will lose heading info but everything else remains.

There is a very technical discussion of the subject, including IAS calculation and other parameters of this flight on pprune.org. Interesting graphs to look at. Unfortunately it is like 900 posts .. you have to read it yourself. The discussion of speeds, stall regime starts at about post #860 and goes on ... So yes, lots of data is missing but something like speed data can be derived (with some error) from what's available.

I don't think they were ever close to a stall, speed data doesn't indicate anything like that. One thing is also clear - they were flying this G/A manually.

But why? What is here to discuss? Who cares what some ###### writes about anything. On top of that you exhibit all the traits of one of those fan-boys you are so eager to rail against. You are under 18? - it shows. BTW, I own neither of these two products, never owned any 747 sim, never cared for a 747 on my desktop but just looking at this video alone - I would have a hard time picking up the winner. I did notice a most likely slightly better resolution of the iFly's cockpit rendering.

And where exactly is "here"?? Don't you think this info would be helpful? I am in the US and made a trip last year to France and flew on Norwegian's 787 - it was relatively "cheap" (in comparison to other offerings). There was a layover in Oslo.

Yes, I know, the info is still vague.

Is it Tesla 3 or S? Tesla S 90kWh has a range of just about 250 m at 70 mph (assuming flat terrain). I prefer to talk Tesla S since 3 doesn't really exist yet, we don't know what car it will be, what options, interior, prices, etc. I have no problem with all your calculations except the price of the actual car is conspicuously left out. Tesla S with that range that's almost $80K, almost twice as much as I am about to pay for a very nice and rather luxuriously appointed Lexus, brand new, and not one of their tiny hybrids. Perhaps one day there will be a Tesla that will make immediate sense for me in terms of all the factors I care about.

Sounds to me like a pure electric-car propaganda, I never heard anyone raise those points as arguments against electric cars, except perhaps the range, range is indeed limited, if I want to drive 500+ miles (which are often do) and accomplish it in 8 or so hours in a fairly sparsely populated areas I could use perhaps a hybrid but purely electric car is of little use to me. But another point is totally missing here - price. Of course I do understand that if your primary use of the car is commute to work or drive around town - electric car could be a Godsend.

So we both pre-ordered new cars. I ordered a 2016 Lexus IS-350 (non-sport) :smile:

I would usually go far - to justify utility of an airplane (for short trips I might use a car, right?), some ski trips 200 nm away or some Grand Canyon trips (over 600 nm), etc. or some camping in Avalon (300 nm). But I still want to do even further trips like Glacier National Park, etc. But I agree, there is no such thing as a 'typical' GA flight, mind you GA even includes flying on Gulfstreams across oceans. You don't use such airplanes to 'get out of town'.

And what exactly is this 'correct time'?? G1000 in my Cirrus SR22T (in real life) gives me UTC time by default however I can manually set a time zone offset (in system page) so it will display time in whatever time zone I wish. Is it realistic enough? :wub: It comes from $80,000 worth of avionics.

maybe for this guy but not for pilots, they (should) use UTC time and all these problems disappear. Problem of time zones really is not part of aviation, it is for passengers to figure out what the local time is when they disembark.

This airport has been closed long time ago.

Nothing on the approach plate that would suggest it is a military-only approach and as a pilot I have to go by what info is in front of me. The airport is not restricted to military traffic only. The main reason it is not in G1000 is that Garmin doesn't support final approach course being a curve.

Yes, this one is very unique, other approaches I have seen countless times. If you use something like G1000 - it can normally fly approaches with an arc very easily with A/P coupled. But the catch is that and arc is flown with GPS guidance and the final approach course must be flown with whatever is prescribed - VOR, LOC, etc. But here the whole approach including the final course is an arc- I went to see how my G1000 Garmin trainer would handle it - it turns out this particular approach is missing from its database. All other approaches at MTN are available except this one, makes actually perfect sense if you realize how a typical approach within G1000 is constructed, this approach escapes typical classification. Thanks for sharing.