lcseale53

Thanks Michael,When we moved to Florida we thought we'd left the tornados behind, but as we've seen over the last decade or so even here we're at risk. Ironically, a few years back we took a hit from a smaller one here in Lakeland that peeled about half of our shingles off and carried the kid's trampoline a few yards down. It was time for a roof anyway.Welcome back, by the way. I haven't seen you post in a while.Regards,Leon

Having lived in west central Alabama for a number of years prior to moving to Florida, I can vouch for the lack of warning a tornado gives. The only thing certain during tornado season is that the threat exists every day. I've been in high school when the entire roof departed the building, complete with a bus spinning in the air, I've been under a spawning tornado that dropped a hundred foot interstate service station sign like a wet dishrag and scattered debris from an obliterated Holiday Inn from Tuscaloosa to Birmingham. We've lost acquaintances in tornadoes - I even had an old CFI of mine hit directly on final with a student and thrown into a hangar roof (which they somehow survived)- just to mention a few. At the beginning of each season we even had a week of tornado awareness training at the U of A. You are completely defenseless against the wrath of a tornado, aside from taking whatever shelter you have.However, as stated above hurricanes are a different critter all together. If and when reasonable threat of a hit in central Florida is identified I fly mine back up to my Dad's place in Alabama - which is generally past the worst of tornado season. Incidentally, that paid off the first time I vacated Lakeland as we took the eye of - I think it was Jean - which pushed in our hangar doors. Ironically, I had taken it up there at the threat of Ivan, which then by-passed us and drew a line on our place up there (all was well though). I'll leave it there usually until the season wanes and then retrieve it.As an interesting note - try showing up at the airline counter having purchased a one-way ticket a couple of hours prior with a flight-bag carrying enough stuff to fly their airplane just about anywhere in the continental US. Then try explaining how you had just flown a plane out of harm's way etc., etc., - then you head on over to the guys behind the screen for the secondary body search.Regards,Leon

Calypso,The link I posted is the only updated version I know of. The lack of landing gear on your current version is indicative of the older version, and the threat of an exploding computer is probably due to something like the FSSound.dll module that's required for compatibility with many older a/c. I'm not sure but it seems like the updated installer puts the module in the modules directory for you. However, you must open your FS9.cfg, buried deep in the bowels of your system, and add the appropriate lines - which are:{OLDMODULES} <=== these are square bracketsFSSound.dll=1Let us know if this helps.Regards,Leon

Andrew,The update is for the entire package and can be found at:http://www.francevfr-us.com/files/falcon50...ll_falcon50.exeDon't forget to fix the aircraft.cfg as noted above.Regards,Leon

Guys,Don't forget to make the inlet area parameter change in the aircraft.cfg. This was a published change when the FS9 update arrived that brings the thrust back to normal.[TurbineEngineData]fuel_flow_gain =0.0025inlet_area =1.4000 <=========rated_N2_rpm =29920static_thrust =3500afterburner_available =0reverser_available =1Regards,Leon

I live very near the Lakeland FlightSafety facility and their chief instructor is a very good friend and flying buddy of mine. I've been in their Navaho and Kingair full motion simulators, and I believe with a little life support equipment I could live for long periods in those cockpits.I hate to drop names here (but I will anyway). August Busch (Anheuser-Busch) has a hangar in our group and frequently brings his 900EX in from St. Louis. That thing is an airliner. He also has, or at least had - though I haven't seen it in a while - a 50 as well.Leon

You are very welcome Rusty. I had forgotten what a nice add-on this a/c is. I particularly like the options providing VC or 2D models, and what the VC lacks in functionality, it more than makes up for in appearance.I've also found that if you drain the tanks to about 50% it tames the approach attitude somewhat...very manageable. The Falcon also makes you work for that 'greaser'.One other item of note is that the lighting switches do not include a beacon switch. You can always use the 'L' key, but I prefer Etienne Martin's Taxi/Pushback and Electrical panel gauge. It has the complete suite of switches and is a very useful pop-up or stationary tool.Anyway I'm glad I was able to help, and I hope you and yours have a great Christmas and upcoming new year.Leon

Okay, after a search through some back-up stuff I've found the last configuration I was using. The file included with the download uses an inlet_area parameter of 4.4 and the corrected value is 1.4 as shown below...at least that's what I found, and as I remember it. I think I'm going to resurrect this one as well. Leon[TurbineEngineData]fuel_flow_gain =0.0025inlet_area =1.4000rated_N2_rpm =29920static_thrust =3500afterburner_available =0reverser_available =1

A quick search yielded this link. It's still live and produces a download. I downloaded the file but did not run the install, so proceed with caution. I will look for the inlet fix.Regards,Leonhttp://www.francevfr-us.com/files/falcon50...ll_falcon50.exe

There is an FS9 update of the Falcon 50 out there somewhere (can't remember where at the moment). It is a reasonably well done upgrade, but if I remember correctly, there was a incorrect parameter given to an engine inlet - or something similar. There was a fix posted which corrected the problem, but without the correct value the airplane was severely underpowered.The only other problem I remember was a fairly high angle of attack at approach airspeed. Aside from that, and with the other fix applied, it's still a great airplane.Someone else out there may remember where the thing resides, and I'll look when I get a chance.Regards,Leon

I had to get up off the floor after that one. That's my previous boss' name, and if anyone's name rated an effeciency factor it would be his.I'm on the floor again.Leon

Shannon,I have been going through the medical process for 37 years, and have worn contacts the entire time. However, I've never been allowed to take the vision test with contacts in - only glasses. The medical certificate will then state that the holder "must wear corrective lenses while exercising privileges of this airman's certificate", or something similar. This includes contacts. I also used monovision lenses for a while at the suggestion of my medical examiner's optometrist, who assured me that she had other pilot's wearing them. At the next physical I told my examiner and he promptly took me out of those and put me back in the standard. Monovision is not allowed (according to the doc). Multi-focal (bi-focal) contacts are, however, allowed with the appropriate paperwork submitted by your AME.As far as the blood pressure issue, I believe you are allowed 155 over 95 at the time of the exam, as they recognize the onset of 'white coat syndrome' in many patients (including myself). Additionally there are are a number of BP medications on the FAA approved list.If you are approaching the FAA with the possibility of a special issuance situation, they can be more agreeable than most folks realize. The key (absolute must) is to research your situation thoroughly and prepare ALL the necessary paperwork prior to your first application. I have been through the process a couple of times and the holy grail is preparation of the appropriate paperwork up front, including quotes form the regs, test results, doctor's assessmentRegards,Leon

Bob,I noticed the panel bitmap edit and cfg entry for the TCAS were not included in the latest release. I used the support e-mail address given in the panel docs. Was this incorrect?Regards,Leon

Hi Travis and all,With respect to cross country travel in the 206, I do a couple of 500-600 mile trips a year in mine and the roll imbalance is really a minor issue if you change tanks every hour or so. The comfort level, though, I think is improved over the 182 on long trips. I can actually station my wife at the controls and step back (okay, squeeze back) into the middle row of seats and lounge/stretch somewhat, or she can do the same adding greatly to the comfort.As to the OP's original comment concerning size; while the 206 shares a wing with the 182 (at least the early models did), the fuselage is significantly larger with 6 full size seats and a bench in the baggage compartment that will hold 120 pounds of kids. Total useful load on the spartan model stationair with full fuel is a little better than 1200 pounds.While I'm here I'll also add a comment for those with the Carenado model. They do a fair job reproducing a heavy aircraft feel, but while the Carenado rendition will continue to hold altitude with a significant power reduction, the real 206 will drop like a rock when the power is reduced just a few inches. With 30 degrees of flaps on final you need around 20 inches of manifold pressure to keep your rate of descent below 500 fpm. Regards,Leon

Will do.

Bob et al,If any of you are interested, and have not already done so yet, I've doctored the panel bitmap just enough to accommodate Lee Hetherington

Nice work Michael...it ain't bragging when you can back it up!Congratulations!Regards,Leon

The FX 5600XT seems to have a problem with the 91.31 NVIDIA drivers at AA = 2X (on the referenced opening menu), but everything else works fine...as far as I've been able tell. I think I'll just deal with it until the next version. Regards,Leon

The price of progress. Thanks, I appreciate the info.Leon

Same thing happened to me just yesterday. Along with a reinstallation of FS9 I installed the 91.31 video drivers. Anyone know of a connection between the two?Regards,Leon

In fact, right here at Avsim you can download the latest complete ERJ package compiled by Charles Fox with Bill Grabowski's updated panel and a host of Dreamwings ERJ's painted every which way. This is a payware quality package...highly recommended.cferjworld.zip Regards,Leon

Kind of depends on the mission. Keep the CHT in the green and you will be fine. Gradual descents are preferred, but power-on spirals work if you need to accelerate your descent. The 206 is a pretty draggy airplane so you can also ease the nose over somewhat and maintain a pretty good rate of descent without overspeeding the airplane. You can also slow the plane down, reduce power, and set up a pretty good rate of descent using pitch (up), or flaps (get the nose down though).A technique a friend of mine with a Glasair uses (well...used until the FAA set up a field office) was to ask ATC for the option (to land or not) and set up a cruise-power descent to the approach end of the runway. Indicating near 200 knots he would level at about 20' above the deck and at mid-field pull to the vertical and roll onto the downwind leg. At that point the airspeed was in check and he would pull the power to fly the approach to a landing. No shock cooling because the airflow was greatly reduced at pattern speed. But what a rush!Regards,Leon

Ryan,The placard is located on the instrument panel typically near the fuel flow indicator. I cannot recall the numbers as I rarely focus on the thing (doing most of my flying from near sea level). But if you are operating out of fairly high airports, arbitrarily five thousand feet or better, use a common technique that will maximize your power. With the mixture full rich, prop full forward, apply full throttle - then - begin leaning until you see a slight drop in RPM. At that point ease the mixture back in to regain the lost RPM (and maybe another turn on the vernier for insurance). At that point you will be at your maximum power setting for the altitude. Release brakes and go.After take-off refer to the chart included in the POH for altitude/manifold pressure/mixture settings.Regards,Leon

They all bounce like a model 'T' on a rocky road in sufficient turbulence. On many of these summer days in Florida I can't catch the radio knob to change frequencies in my C206. Many of you know the drill - grab the panel eyebrow and crawl your fingers down the stack until you get to the bouncing knob. That said though, even a 152 rides like an easy chair in calm air. Early morning or late evening/night air (or even winter mid-day) can be very smooth and enjoyable.Regards,Leon

I do have the conventional set-up and the steering is certainly more difficult than even a 182, but you kind of expect it just due to the size of the thing. I make a sharp 90 in front of the hangar door coming back in at slow speed to align it, but I also use brake with the turn. My guess is it's easier to work than your oversized set-up, but even with the conventional rig differential braking goes a long way to ease the workload. Everything about the 206 just takes a little manhandling.Leon