Jump to content

Bearracing

Frozen-Inactivity
  • Content Count

    282
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bearracing

  1. Bill,For a really excellent example of "Glacier Girl", the P-38 you mentioned, check out this freeware example designed by David Copely from the AVSIM Library: http://library.avsim.com/esearch.php?DLID=...hor=&CatID=Root Bear!
  2. Jeff,It sounds like you've got some issues other than just the number of areas you've added on. I've done like what Don Moser has suggested, in that I've consolidated my addons by continents.If the addon scenery does not contain any flatten or exclude files, I then include it into a common scenery and texture folder for that area, for example:Folder names and sub-folders in my Addon Scenery folder in my FS2002 root directory are as follows:01 EuropeUKFranceSpainItalyAustria_SwissGermanyOtherscenerytexture02 AsiaRussiaChinaJapanOtherscenerytexture03 Africascenerytexture04 North AmericaUnited StatesCanadaMexicoscenerytexture05 Oceaniascenerytexture06 Bush CountryAlaskaCanadaOtherscenerytexture07 Norwegian countriesscenerytexture08 Central South Americascenerytexture09 Caribbeanscenerytexture10 Mesh SceneryscenerytextureBy using this method, I have roughly 25GB of addon scenery and I'm up to area.367 and layer.313 in my scenery.cfg file, with no crashes or operational problems.Bear!
  3. Pilot737,Darrell pretty much hit the nail on the head. We're going to be bringing a new server online within the next few weeks (3 or 4) and because the SS Forum was using so much of the bandwidth with our old system, it was decided to shut it down first.The biggest problem we were having was that we had established a few very easy to follow set of rules, but it was amazing how no one bothered to read them and of course follow them. Hopefully we'll be able to control it better with our new server come late March or early April. Don't worry though,the SS Forum will return!Bear!
  4. JetBlue,At our conference (AVSIM) last fall, Boeing and Microsoft both had representives there and it was obvious, and stated several times by both parties, that Boeing & Microsoft have a open working releationship. Besides, they are just across the river from each other, up in the State of Washington. It really doesn't have anything to do with being American or European, or being Martian for that matter, it just why would you go halfway around the world for data when the largest producer of commercial airliners in the world is barely 5 miles away?Microsoft has stated several times that their choices of aircraft are always dictated by what is available for them to test for real or there is sufficient data available that it makes economic sense. Their choices also don't really have anything to do with what members of the FS team own either, otherwise we would have seen a Maule back in FS2000, that is because one of the program managers and one of the product managers each own one! Bear!
  5. An other obstruse sentence: whether you wanted it or not, this sentence is quite confusing.If ever they managed to do this pattern, this was CERTAINLY NOT in the flight we are talking about. They may have achieved this but a long time after, in 1908 I believe.The december 17th of 1903 flights were straight forward flights no longer than 260 meters (59 sec).Mines,If you check the original Wright Bros. documents, I believe you will see that they did make a 180 degree turn on that first day (on their 18th or 19th flight), but the Wright Flyer lacked sufficient power to maintain altitude during the maneuver. The Wright Flyer II, which flew 8 months later, had a newly designed engine that was capable of nearly twice the horsepower at the same weight and it was with this version that they were able to fly continuously in a circle and maintain their altitude. (information from American National Archives)A much later design (having more conventional ailerons and having the elevators moved to the rear) was demonstrated to the US Army by the Wright Brothers in 1908 (hence why you may recall that date). After 1908, the Wright Bros. did little to advance the design of aircraft, as they spent most of their time and money in court attempting to protect their patents. When everyone mentions "controlled" flight, it is referring to the ability to turn, left or right, without using one's body weight to achieve. The Wright Bros. had spent many hours testing in their homemade wind-tunnel to perfect their technique of "wing-warping" to achieve controlled roll! Everything that had flown (heavier than air) before the Wright Bros lacked the controls to have the ability to takeoff on its own, maintain altitude, and then turn around and land back where it took off from. It is pretty much as simple as that! Frankly, what the Wright Brothers really did invent, that truly affected history, was their having invented a light-weight engine with sufficient power to make an airplane (heavier than air) work, that in my mind was their greatest achievement!As far as who or whom flew the first hot air balloon or glider, well that's pretty much up for grabs, but I can assure you it wasn't the French! Peruvian (South America) Indians were flying hot air balloons as early as 2,000 BC and there is substantial evidence that other cultures were flying gliders even earlier than that!As far as who was first on the moon, the only reason the Americans beat the Soviets was because our German scientists were better than their German scientists! :-lolBear!
  6. Paul,Interesting what you say here, as I too agree that having taildragger time is important for any pilot wishing to hone his skills! Here's a quote from my Bush Flying in FS2002 article from last November!"Retired Captain Manton Fain first soloed in 1942 and the aircraft, of course, was a Piper Cub, but 50 years later Manton Fain retired from the left seat of the Concorde. During a recent interview, Mr. Fain commented, "If you can fly a Cub, you can fly the Concorde, but the reverse is not necessarily true!" Again, Captain Fain was relating to the general difficulty in handling a taildragger type aircraft at low speeds in a crosswind. Trust me, it is not an easy thing to do, especially for those pilots that have learned to fly with a tri-cycled geared aircraft."Bear!
  7. Of those videos, the one showing the Jenny flying through the open barn doors is the best! When you download the file (flightsim.com) and watch it, keep your eyes open for the half dozen chickens scattering out of the way as the Jenny goes through the barn itself!Bear!
  8. You can point out different things about when, where, and who did what in aviation, but the fact is that the first "controlled and sustained" flight was on December 17th, 1903, period! There is now evidence that hot air balloons may have been flown as long as 4,000 years ago and there is increasing possibilities that man flew gliders as early as 1,500 BC, but the first time anyone ever took to the air with a powered aircraft that was controllable were the two Wright Bros., 100 years ago this year.There had been several individuals that had flown powered aircraft, up to a year before the Wright Brothers, but the Wright Bros. were the first to have an aircraft that not only could stay in the air under its own power, but they had flight controls so that you could turn around and land where you took off from. No one else had ever done that!Bear!
  9. Dave,I checked out that website link you provided and Oh Wow! I've seen photos of that aircraft over the years, but never knew what it was, but I am impressed and that is simply outstanding to get something of that classic design as a default aircraft! Microsoft..., I believe you've just made my summer! Between the Wiley Post Winnie Mae Vega and this beautiful de Havilland air racer, it is unlikely anyone will hear from me for months!Bear!Give me a propeller, an engine, the wind in my hair, and a compass then I'm as happy as a pig in slop!
  10. Dave,Thanks for the clearifcation on that point. I am not that fimilar with the early de Havilland aircraft and I assumed that the DH88 was the jet airliner. Made more sense to me that Microsoft would have included the world's first jet airliner rather than a racer, but I'm not privey to their thinking on this. Its also rather unusual that an aircraft manufacturer would use the name "Comet" on two completely different types of aircraft? Interesting.I am quite fimilar with the engineering details surrounding the crash of the two Comets (DH106s) in 1953 and 1954, which lead to the demise of Britain's lead in the jet airliner design industry (and opened the door for Boeing and their 707), but I am not that aware of their (de Havilland) model numbers.I've always been amazed on how one simple thing can have such a dramatic impact on history, like the fact that by de Havilland designing square windows rather than round windows on the Comet (DH106) would effectively eliminate de Havilland (and Britain) from the airliner design industry and Boeing would become the power in airliner design.Bear!
  11. Paul,I agree that the Aeronca Champ was a fine airplane and I personally have a couple of hours logged in one, but when Microsoft decided to include 10 aircraft of historical significance there are going to be alot of aircraft NOT included. Its difficult to compare an aircraft where there were only a few hundred built (Aeronca Champion) to an aircraft where there were thousands built (Jenny and Piper Cub). The Jenny and the Piper Cub each simply provided more impact on the history of flight.Bear!Note: There are only 9 aircraft listed for Microsoft's historical aircraft, but there are in fact 10, that is because you do get two versions of the Lockheed Vega (the standard model and Wiley Post's Winnie Mae).
  12. Stan,You do realize that Microsoft is one of the companies sponsering the traveling interactive flight displays of the "First Flight" don't you? Provided by Microsoft, along with Boeing and other sponsers, you can fly the Wright Flyer, including a seating arangement where you lay on your stomach to fly the MS designed simulation, which will appear at many of the key air show and air events this spring and summer. If you were to release a simulation package titled "Century of Flight", it would be assumed that at mimimum there are two aircraft that must be included; the Wright Flyer and the Ryan NYP! I cannot think of any other two aircraft that are as significant to the history of flight as those two! If you think about it, the choices that MS made are rather well thought out.1. Wright Flyer (first aircraft to make a controlled powered sustained flight)2. Ryan NYP (first solo non-stop trans-Atlantic flight)3 & 4. For the highest percentage of pilots in the 20th century, their first flight experience was most likely in either a Curtiss JN-4 Jenny or a Piper Cub.5 & 6. Douglas DC-3 and Ford Tri-Motor, two of the world's first "practical" airliners.7. Vickers Vimy (many of the earlist flight records were set with this aircraft)8. Lockheed Vega (Winnie Mae), Wiley Post was first to fly around the world with this aircraft.9. Comet DH-88, world's first jet airliner, which flew years before the Boeing 707. Had it not been for its square window design, Britain and de Havilland would be the world's driving force for commercial airliners rather than the USA and Boeing.I would have also liked to of seen the Bell X-1 and Sikorsky S-38 or S-39 included, but what the heck, those they choose are pretty cool!Bear!
  13. Howard,Bill Lyons is one of the really true innovators in our hobby of flight simulation and I have never been disappointed with anything he has ever released, freeware or payware. He and his beautiful wife (Lynn) are partners in their latest designs and the modest fee they ask for their work is merely to assist at supporting the cost of their website. It was Bill that first perfected the dynamic virtual panel (FS98) and his VCs in FS2002 have been truly outstanding. He has also successfully designed an authentic flight model for a hot air balloon (which was released right after all the so called airfile gurus said it couldn't be done in Flight Simulator). Now I must admit that I absolutely love his latest release (the Swift), but it is his Ryan STA that currently has my attention. I'm shortly going to be releasing a review on a couple of Bill's releases and there I will also report on other outstanding downloads available from him. If the joy of flight immersion is your desire, then Bill has captured the real essence of that task through simulation better than any 3rd party developer I can think of.Bear!
  14. Rojan,I'm quite impressed with the choice of historical aircraft, particularly with the "Winnie Mae" Lockheed Vega. Most of the others (excepting the Vickers) have had several very good examples available from the 3rd party developers for FS2000/FS2002, but a fresh batch of older aircraft as default is still welcome. Having a "...NEW batch of MODERN aircraft" would be inappropriate considering the title of this latest release from Microsoft anyway. Its Flight Simulator: A Century of flight!, so including aircraft like the Wright Flyer, Ryan NYP, Piper Cub, Jenny, and other like aircraft fits exactly what the title says. Of course you must realize that I, like many thousands of other FS enthusiasts, much prefer flying the older aircraft rather than just another repaint of a greyhound bus. Being I am a member of EAA (Experimental Aircraft Association) and having a great deal of interest in flying (realworld) antique and classic aircraft, I obviously look at this hobby quite different than the majority do.Bear!http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3e485254071b8f61.jpg
  15. Hmmmm...that's a hard one, but here goes! (given in no particular order)1A. RealAir SF.2601B. VB Planes P-51B/C "Ding Hao"1C. Dwight Booth's Sikorsky UH-60 Blackhawk1D. Greg Pepper's Convair 5802A. ALPHA Sim's F8F Grumman Bearcat2B. Bill-Lynn Lyon's PT-192C. Yannick/Young Dassault Falcon502D. Massimo Taccoli's P180 Avanti3A. Team 7 DASH 73B. POSKY CRJ-2003C. Simubuild Mitsubishi MU-23D. FFG LearJet 35A 4A. POSKY 747-100/200 (Vennesa Lieghtower panel)4B. MELJET 7774C. Project Airbus A320 (Venessa Lieghtower panel)4D. G. Chiacchietta's Lockheed F-16C5A. Mike Stone's Grumman Goose (JL Stubbs Panel, Mike Hambly sounds, Heather Sherman's Duck radio)5B. John Woodward's Lake Renegade (JL Stubbs panel)5C. LAGO Lockheed Sirius (JL Stubbs Panel)5D. Brian Gladden's Zenair 801 (latest model developed from FSDS2)5E. Piper Dakota (Carenado)5F. FSD T-385G. Captain Sim's MiG-215H. MS Cessna Caravan Amphibian5I. Jordan Moore's Schweizer 300C5J. Steven Grant's DHC2 Beaver Amphibian5K. YeoDesigns Boeing 737-200That's my partial list of favorite top "5"!Bear!
  16. OMillerJr,Thanks for the heads up on that Jorge 'eko' Salas Lear 35 panel, its excellent!Bear!
  17. John-Paul,Check out Roger Gilbert's Lear 35A panel for FS2002 in the AVSIM library! (learrlpl.zip)Bear!
  18. Darryl,One of the things we learned during our original review, (here at AVSIM) by the review team, of FS2002 is that the framerate number was of little or no value whatsoever. Smoothness was all that counted and that seemed to be fine, no matter what our specific systems were between the team members. Your new system may not read any fps above 30 fps because you've got your fps locked at 30, have you considered that?Working directly with a couple of fellows from the MSFS design team at the AVISM conference last year, the suggestion was made to lock the fps at 16 - 18, which should yield excellent results and I have found that to be true. I don't have a super system like what you have, but with my system setting locked at 16 fps, my results are more than satisfactory and if I had a system like your's I would probably lock it at the upper end of 18. The numbers themselves mean absolutely nothing, its the end results of how the program appears; is it clear and sharp and most importantly is it smooth?Bear!
  19. Adam,In addition to what has been suggested, I would also add that you adjust the zoom factor down to .62 - .59 or so. One of the problems with creating a 3D world and displaying it on a 2D flat screen is that your eyes and brain need to process the viewed information and calculate time to distance. I have found, through a lot of experimenting, that having my panel view (2D or Virtual) set at .59 is about right for me. Having the zoom view set at the default 1.00 creates a situation of your brain not relating the displayed speed to the perceived speed. On your next approach, while viewing from the 2D panel position, try reducing your zoom ("shift" + "-" keys) and notice how your time to distance becomes more realistic and your approach and landings will become much easier, particularily in the bush!Bear!
  20. Nick,Canada and Alaska probably have more scenery addons available than anywhere else in the world, plus you've got the addition of available aircraft (freeware) that fit every mood as well.Check out my feature article on flying the Great North and there you will find links to enough aircraft and scenery to keep you sufficiently busy for the next few weeks or months.http://www.avsim.com/pages/1102/bush_adven...ush_flying.htmlBear!
  21. Captain,With my flight sim computer, there is so much addon material added, I wouldn't even want to guess where the conflict could be or even where to start looking. I did find it interesting that my other system (with a totally clean install of FS2002Pro) that the same conditions occurred, but like I said above, it seems that those of us that are having problems are very much in the minority. I don't think there is particularily anything that Lee Swordy could or can do to help here, because if it works for him and 95% of those that have installed it then the problem is obviously related to something other than his program. Having this program work for me is not on my priority list anyway as I'm from that 15% group of people that rarely if ever fly small to heavy airliners anyway and most of the airports that I fly into are not tower controlled and only a few even have a paved strip. I have a short list of aircraft that I fly on a regular basis and there is not a single jetliner among them, except for my Delta 727-200 or Tu-144 Concordski! I have a list of about a dozen aircraft that I find myself turning to and except for the two listed above they are all classic props or bush style aircraft. Bear!
  22. I'm glad to hear that others are using the AFCAD program without the difficulties that I and others have experienced, even though it now adds creedence to those that critizied me for not picking Lee's files...hehehe! :-lolBecause I do have two computers here at home that are dedicated to my sims (FS2000-FS2002-CFS2 on one and CFS3-MSTS on the other) I tried a clean install of FS2002 on my system for CFS3-MSTS. My flight sim system is a Compaq 7110 (AMD 1.3Ghz, 256MB ram, GeForce2, WindowsME) while my CFS3-MSTS system is a AMD 1.2Ghz, 512MB ram, GeForce2, Windows98SE. After installing an AFCAD file per Lee's instructions, into the clean install of FS2002 on my second system, all airport starting points contained in that file disappeared from the default airport menu. It seems that my two system configurations are incompatable with Lee's program, so there are simply some system configurations that appear to be a problem while others do not have issues. So it seems that I'm one of those unlucky ones that unfortunately can't use AFCAD.Bear!
  23. JP,From day one, I've never been able to get AFCAD NOT to do this. My system reacts exactly the same as you described and I've never been able to get any answers as to why it does this. Because of several emails from others having experienced this effect, I assumed that it was a condition or characteristic of Lee's program. It is simply why I never picked Lee's program as one of my Bear Picks. I recently purchased and installed LAGO's Honolulu scenery package and with it comes a set of AFCAD files for the Honolulu airport, but as soon as I installed the AFCAD files that was the end of starting at ANY Hawaii based airports. The only way I could get to Hawaii was by starting in San Francisco, then by using the default map, I could use my mouse to drag the aircraft ICON over to the islands. From there I had to set up a "Saved Flight" to get my starting point at any Hawaiian airport, but I found this unacceptable and have removed all AFCAD files because of this. To be completely frank, I assumed that this is the way AFCAD works and from that I assumed that everyone experienced this problem and some people were just willing to put up with it as a characteristic of the AFCAD program. Based on the statements from some of the posters here, it sounds like I maybe wrong!Bear!
  24. At startup now, I always get the "building scenery database" run, which is a sign of trouble.Ted,Being one that has installed gigabites of scenery and aircraft addons, I too ran into the problem of my system always running "building scenery database" at startup, but my system has always done that and in 1 1/2 years I have never been able to identify what or which scenery install has caused it. I suspect it is one of the LandClass files in my main FS2002 "Scenery" folder. Frankly I don't think it is any problem nor do I believe it is related to any possible impending problem either. Because of several personal obligations, I've had to severly curtail my weekly "Bear Picks", not to mention I ran into a situation of my system being over taxed because of the size of my scenery and aircraft folders (over 45GB for the two). This is causing a large number of other problems for me as well, but as time goes on, I am slowly removing file after file and getting them down to just the files I use most often. Until I get a new system, I really don't know if I can renew my weekly Bear Picks or not.Bear!
  25. Josh,I don't mean to step on your line, but your statement "..Broadband is available in many forms, and ARE available pretty much anywhere. Time to move on." is simply not true. I am stuck with a dialup modem (56K) and I've been told that it will be 2 or 3 more years before anything other than dialup will be available where I live, not to mention that a large number of other internet users, particularly those living in some countries other than the United States or Canada, don't have the option of anything other than dialup either. When individuals load up 10 or more screenshots, it takes as much as 5 or more minutes sometimes for them upload on my system (with each jpg at 100Kb it requires 4:30 minutes to download 10 images, then you've got those out of control signatures that several people were using in the past, well you get my point). Bear!
×
×
  • Create New...