AlaskanFlyboy

It's an old thread I know, but I stumbled on it looking for an answer to adding custom ground handling equipment to match the VA I fly with. If I'm understanding this correctly, this is now possible as of the 2.9.2 update? If so, where would I find a paint kit and instructions for creating a custom operator for our VA?

Having worked with UPS ground operations in Spokane, I can say Kyle Rodger's breakdown is similar to my experience with their procedures. We marshaled the jet in, signaled that the crew stairs were in place with the "raise air stair" signal and that chocks were inserted. If they took a while in the cockpit, the mechanic would jack in to ask if there was some issue (which often just sped them up getting out of the plane). On push out, the mechanic jacked in and confirms the bypass pin is still inserted and all the stuff Kyle mentioned, then signaled that brakes were released and the pushback started. Once stopped, the mechanic signaled that the brakes were set and we disconnected the towbar from the pushback, then from the plane (never in the opposite order). Mechanic pulls the bypass pin and waves it to the pilots as the pushback drives off and another guy drags the tow bar back by hand (don't ask, it was a UPS thing). Pilots make a quick flash of the taxi light to signal they're ready to roll and the marshaller directs them off the ramp to the taxi way. I don't know what all the mechanic says to the pilots since I was in the pushback and between the massive hi-rev diesel in that and the jet engines starting up, I never heard specifics. I just know the mechanic cleared engine starts.

As Skelsey said, typically the lettering just denotes the same navaid approach with minor changes such as missed approach procedures. However, this is the first set I've seen where they have multiple ILS systems for the same runway. I'm not sure in the other sims, but a quick trial with AFX has proven that FS9 only allows one ILS per runway. This would cause the navdata to disagree with the sim.

I don't get around on here as often as I used to, but you've built a site that will live on just by the strength of the community that surrounds it. Hell, it survived an intentional attack that should have killed it. You've got a great team backed by a great community that wants to seed it thrive and succeed. So, I wouldn't worry too much about us. This is the time to be with family and friends. You'll be in my prayers, and just remember that it's not over 'til it's over. I've known people that have far out-lived dire prognoses. Whatever the time frame, just don't forget to say hi to the other patron saints of virtual aviation. I'm sure Richard Harvey has a copy of a heavenly flight sim waiting, and Opa's got a ton of freeware made for it by now.

I've actually taken a look at some of the files. I'm not sure about for the lower 48, but the Alaska area water files have some data errors. Fortunately, I've found they're easily (but tediously) editable with QGIS.

Your radio is functioning correctly. It is common for frequencies to be truncated on publications since pilots know from ground school that the only options are xxx.x00, xxx.x25, xxx.x50, and xxx.x75. There is no .x21, .x22, etc. So, 136.12 would in fact be 136.125.

The best place would be the developer's forum at forum.iemit.com/. You'll want the "Unofficial PIC EMB forum".

Active Sky is definitely nice to have as it seems to do a great job of handling weather, it also simulates updrafts and downdrafts to a degree, though I'm not sure what all it takes into consideration when it does it. It also allows for a lot more fine-tuning of weather as you can set minimums and maximums for just about everything. It also adds wake-turbulence, but I haven't quite whittled that down to a level that doesn't feel excessive.

The stripes generally have any meaning the company deems fit. Given private pilots don't have a uniform unless they're wanting to be geeks and commercial pilots for smaller outfits have worn three stripes and four-stripes, though even most of them are generally not given formal uniforms. I don't know why they would even be mentioned in such a list. I imagine the system originally started when there was a flight engineer and a navigator, which may account for the single-stripe and double-stripe, but there's really no standardization across the airlines. Some airlines wear silver, some wear gold, some wear both.

In a cross wind landing you would bank into the wind and rudder away. Ruddering into it would only increase the angle between the nose of the aircraft and the runway centerline.

In the air or on the ground, it doesn't matter, the same effect applies as the aircraft will want to nose into the wind. As one mentioned earlier, most of the vertical surface of aircraft is behind the aircraft's pivot point on the ground. The effect generally is less noticeable on the ground however. It should also be noted that cars have more vertical surface across their whole body and almost all of that surface in in front of its pivot point.

Was there an aircraft that landed recently before you? If so, are you running Active Sky? Active Sky will simulate wake turbulence off the AI aircraft that can be a little extreme if you have it set to 100%.

The majority of virtual airlines focus on a specific airline, either fictional or real-world. It often allows for the VA to operate more realistically with staff doing dispatching or other items, and for the real-world based VAs they only have to track the scheduling on a single airline. Sim Airline and Flying Tigers are about the only conglomerate VAs I'm aware of. You may have more luck in creating a list of aircraft you want to be flying and seek a VA that will let you fly those aircraft.

Interestingly, this thread is reminding me of a talk on management that I heard at a leadership conference by Gary Hamel. One of the concepts he kicked around was, "Are our businesses models changing as fast as the world is? Or are our businesses atrophying as as our model becomes outdated?" In reading the article, that was the main thing I was picking up on it. The game is changing rapidly in just about every market in the world, but most are holding to age old concepts that for the most part are showing they no longer apply. More innovative companies are beginning to beat out long standing ones. Just look at what Southwest has done to the airline industry, and most of the industry is still doing business as they always have and are dying while Southwest somehow manages to thrive.Most of the posters here don't sound like they're trying to legitimize piracy, but to point out that the playing field is changing and it requires game plans to change. As Peter said, piracy is, unfortunately, here to stay. How do you either work with it or try to minimize it's impact? The article mentioned the author's way, which I agree with a few, wouldn't work in the Flight Sim market, but certainly there are places innovation can take root. I've enjoy a lot of the payware products that you guys develop and it would be a shame to see any of you fail because you failed to find a way to adapt to an ever-changing landscape.

I hope you enjoy it as much as I have. I only wish Midcon was still flying them, as it was fun getting dispatch releases and taking it up.

I own both and love them both. I flew both for Midcontinent Virtual Airlines, but as we had about 50 300s, 30 400s, 5 700s, and 3 800s. I generally ended up flying mostly the PIC. Both have a strong fan base which gives good support for any of the small issues you may find with either, including good tweaks if you feel you might want to fine tune your settings on them. I do like the modeling of multiple engines on the PIC, which allowed me to jump between the two engine types on our 300s. If you get the PIC, I would say look on the library (once it's back) for some third-party sound files though as a few of the sounds on the aircraft are a little out-of-wack. There were a couple good sound packages when you searched for PIC, so hopefully they'll be there for you when it returns.

I must have lost that part in the screen flood.Yeah. There should be minimal lean on the ground unless you're making a hard turn. I do know Mikko's Maule, and Aerosoft's Beaver and Piper on the tundra tire are rather wobbly. Otherwise, normal aircraft should tip to the outside of the turn and just come back to level as you straighten back out.

I haven't flown the Carenado 152, but the Flight1 model was pretty good. Granted I've only had 16 hours of time shared amongst the 150 and 152 in the real world. If I could find my logbook, I'd break down those hours more just as a caveat, unfortunately I misplaced it somewhere in the 3 years I haven't flown and hope to find it when I pack to move in a few months. The Carenado model looks much, much nicer but I haven't bought it yet, and even if I did, it's been close to 10 years since I flew the 152 in the real-world. You might be able to marry the model of the Carenado bird and airfile and elements of the cfg to the Flight1 bird if you find the Carenado to not feel right.

Technically, the wings should bank when turning with the rudder. It has to do with the wing on the outside of the turn going faster than the wing on the inside of the turn, thus the outside wing having greater lift than the inside. So my question would be, how much rudder do you have to kick in before it makes drastic yaw movement?

Speaking of SATAN, it happens to be in the infamous Tweety approach into Portsmouth, NH.http://www.naco.faa.gov/d-tpp/0902/00678R16.PDF

Best-Selling doesn't always equate to Most-Used. Even I bought it and I've only flown perhaps 10 hours in it since its release while logging over 100 in F9 in the same period. I know I've spent several hundred dollars in add-ons, very few of which are FSX compatible, so I ended up sticking to FS9. I'm still buying add-ons for FS9.

It does that with mine as well, even before his airport was added into my collection. It has something to with the 38m terrain and level of Lake Hood/Spenard versus the surrounding landing fields.

I'm in no rush for the next one. I still haven't even migrated to FSX and am still buying add-ons for FS9. As I've seen in news blips, they've only canned the development team, but still are holding on to their titles and support of them. If you're worried about the MS weather servers closing (which I doubt they will quite yet), I'd look into one of the weather add-ons such as Active Sky.

In my experience, FS's ATC does see Flight levels. I fly with real-world weather all the time via Active Sky and have never been called out while on the standard (29.92) setting. What Martin is talking about, as best I can understand, is that the altitude reported in the data line (Pressing Shift-Z) is different from that reported on the aircraft panel. If that is the case, I'm pretty sure that the data line always shows the true MSL altitude regardless of altimeter setting on the panel.

I actually haven't used it for FSX yet. All that I mentioned has been from my experience with ASA in FS9. The simulation of turbulence and updrafts/downdrafts are greatly improved it seems.