Jump to content

dseagrav

Members
  • Content Count

    80
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Flight Sim Profile

  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    VATSIM
  • Virtual Airlines
    No
  1. The update page at http://www.fs2crew.com/cart/pages/FS2Crew%3A-PMDG-737-NGX-Edition.html links to here, which is probably the source of the confusion.
  2. Some of those had radio altimeters toward the end of the war - Maybe it's the antenna.
  3. I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that the impact on pilots is worth more than a little girl's life. That is TOTALLY not what I feel. I meant that this action is so patently evil and vile that you cannot possibly have done worse with an airplane. This is the worst anyone could do.Edit: Additionally, and reluctantly, were a ban on general aviation proposed in response to this action, I do not feel I could oppose the ban and remain on sound moral footing. My hobby is dear to me, but not worth trying to justify the actions of this evil being.
  4. http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/arti...D=2007703060397Geez, the anti-aviation lobby couldn't have asked for any more.
  5. Your link, not your article. I should have worded that better.
  6. {Sorry; First paragraph redacted... that's going too far. My sincerest apologies to anyone who read that and was offended by it. I am not racist or anti-semetic, and I do not intend to devalue the sacrifices of the holocaust.}I would have no problem giving consideration to the other side of this argument if it weren't a series of misrepresentations and biased half-truths designed to mislead the public and ensure that I can't fly anymore. This won't "force corporate jets from the runway" like the commenter in your linked article wishes, and it won't prevent the rich from jetting wherever they wish - They can afford to pay. It won't make ticket prices substantially cheaper - The airlines will lower prices by some token amount and pocket the remainder. It won't remove any tax burden from the public - The government will put that tax money to other uses, or in their own pockets. The only thing this does is ensure that myself and people like me can't fly.
  7. Also, we pay a higher tax than the airlines do. For private use, avgas is taxed at 19.4
  8. This whole thing is just to benefit the airlines anyway. I would have much less of a problem paying for satellite-based ATC if I had the ability to use it, but the features they want to add have nothing to do with a 152. They aren't adding any significant new functionality, no better weather or better coverage, they just want to have computer-controlled dispatching so they can stop paying dispatchers, and they want to use more regional jets so they can pay pilots less. The whole thing is just the airline management trying to fleece everyone from the top down.
  9. If you were ever planning to fly in real life, or want to see general aviation continue in the real world, you really should consider joining the AOPA -RIGHT NOW- or you may lose the chance forever.The white house has submitted its budget for the 2007 fiscal year, and the new FAA budget, which is required to be decided by September, includes a 400% increase in fuel taxes and substantial user fees. The total cost of private flying is expected to increase over 500%.The reason for the increases and funding changes is that the government no longer wants the FAA to be tax-supported and wishes to move the costs of operation to pilots. We're being forced to foot the bill for a system designed to put us out of business. The airlines want a next-generation satellite-based surveillance system to replace the existing radar system, which would allow them to fly more smaller jets and replace dispatchers with computers. They try to justify this by pointing out that Europe has this system already - and in Europe, there is no general aviation. Private airplanes are almost exclusively business jets owned by the very wealthy. The rank and file take the airlines; the private skies are reserved for their masters.I am not exaggerating in the least - I have no political agenda and represent no group, except that I am an AOPA member. But I am not typing for the AOPA. I'm typing for pilots. Our fellow pilot in the white house has sold us out. The implementation of these fees will END GENERAL AVIATION AS WE KNOW IT. And that's what they want. The airline lobby and their backers want the common rank and file chained to the ground where they "belong".The news will try to spin this in their favor - Talking about how this will make ticket prices cheaper, and about how rich corporate fatcats and their private jets should pay a "fair share" - But don't be fooled. The goal of these fees is to make sure that a general-aviation "flying car" like the ones envisioned in the past will never exist; and those that do exist will be the privilege of the wealthy. Your children will never fly. Never again will someone look up in the sky and see a Cessna or a Piper and dream.Please, for the sake of pilots present, past, and future; FIGHT THIS.Join the AOPA. Write your congresscritters. MAKE NOISE. We cannot allow this to succeed.
  10. Sounds a lot like Wilco and Anticyclone with A320PIC...
  11. I can confirm this is an nvidia bug and not an FSX bug because FS9 does the same thing for me. It does it when ANY window overlays the FS window, be it a tooltip, a subwindow, a dialog box, the alt-tab box, instant messenger, whatever. I got around it by disabling tooltips and avoiding overlaying the FS window.I haven't reported it to nvidia because both times I've reported a driver bug to nvidia they just tell me to uninstall the driver and buy another video card or go back to some ancient version of the driver and "wait for the next release". In fact, this started happening to me when nvidia tech support had me uninstall and reinstall their driver three times because the new nvidia control application guesses the wrong language for my computer.
  12. No, not even a scratch! I sure felt stupid though. My instructor wasn't pleased either.We were on a paved runway (3MY), and she was explaining "All you have to do is hold some back pressure while you take off..." and demonstrated as she was speaking, except for pushing the power in. She pulled the yoke almost to the stop, so I assumed that was what I was supposed to do. I took the yoke where she had it, added a bit more back pressure, then pushed the power in before she had a chance to do much about it. The nose came up before I could react to it, because I didn't know the prop wash was strong enough to have any effect with no airspeed. (I was expecting to hold the pressure until the wheel started to lift and then back off) The instructor already knew what was coming and was pushing the nose back down as soon as it lifted. It hit the tail but not very hard. Just enough to get a nice, loud "BANG!" out of it and scare the wits out of me. It didn't even set off the ELT (which is in the tail.) There is a small skid attached to the tail tiedown loop, and that's what hit pavement. I assume it bent a little, but I couldn't tell. We decided since it didn't hit very hard and there was no visible damage it was best to vacate the area before anyone saw us. :( I got a "Don't ever do that again!" type speech afterward. It was funny afterward but I wouldn't advise anyone else do this.In my defense, (to date) that is the only part of the airplane I have allowed to touch the ground, other than the tires.
  13. I'm not dumping on FSX, I like my copy. Calm down.I tested as follows: I loaded a Piper Cub under default weather, set the parking brake, advanced the throttle, and tried to raise the tail. I couldn't. Then I loaded a C172 and tried to raise the nose with the parking brake set. I couldn't. I've seen the Cub lift its tail in real life (Well, a video of it), and I've also personally banged the tailskid of a 152 on the runway (at zero airspeed) by pulling far too hard while attempting my first soft-field takeoff. I can't do either in FSX, so I think it doesn't simulate prop wash over the elevator, or at least not at zero airspeed.
×
×
  • Create New...