Tim_Capps

But your argument proves the reality of ET visits. Why go through the trouble of debunking something that isn't bunk? As for the "friendly and harmless" part, those are only kind of aliens we'd want to keep secret, otherwise the poor things would be hounded to death. This guy represented approximately 3400 people in the capital of the Granite State of New Hampshire before his retirement. I respectfully submit that we must not be quick to dismiss such testimony from the very highest political offices in these United States, especially one involved in Veteran Affairs. Of course, the nexus between the VA and UFOs is too obvious for comment. On the other hand, he did blink HELP ME in morse code and referenced "this evening" when it was clearly broad daylight through the window. I would be interested to know where he is now, or whether he has been "conveniently" removed from the scene.

I had the overspeed problem in FSX and QW went above and beyond in support, but we were never able to get it resolved. I assume it doesn't affect everyone, so I guess it's just one of those things. And that was FSX, not P3D. The Captain Sim 757 was their original transitional glass product, IIRC, and the current iteration works fine in v5.2. I think it's the better airplane, but, aside from the overspeed issue I had in FSX, I don't have anything bad to say about the QW 757. I haven't experienced the autopilot issues others have reported in the CS 757. It doesn't seem to be as nimble as it needs to be for certain approaches (I'm thinking of anything with a fish hook procedural turn) so I wouldn't expect a fire-and-forget airplane. VNAV works fine for me, although you'll see a lot people saying "VNAV is broken" (and a lot of other things). I think it may come down to how you fly the airplane, how "hands on" you like to be, and what procedures you use. I'm not going to say I've never experienced a busted limit or lateral excursion, but they've never been often enough to bother me. I think Aerosoft's Airbus series does automation durn near perfect, for example. I don't think CS ever really nailed glass airplanes as well as some other devs, and I regretted their decision to abandon their steam gauge niche, but I think more people are interested in newer airplanes. For a survey developer, though, which is what they've really been, I think they've done a good job. If you use ATC, you shouldn't have any autopilot issues. If you prefer to fly from start to finish using procedures, I'd monitor it for the rare excursion and be aware of its limitations, but I've probably logged more hours on it than any other airplane--I did the original review here on it and it used to be my favorite airplane. I don't fly it much anymore, though, for the same reasons it was retired from passenger service: it's niche got filled with other airplanes and it just doesn't feel different enough from the CS 737-300 or 767. I'd just rather fly something different for a route that length, like the iFly 737NG, an Airbus or even an L1011 or DC-8. So many airplanes, so little time! The CS forum isn't what it used to be for sure. There used to be a very friendly and active community that provided excellent peer-to-peer support and mods, which was pretty much what support there ever was. Do other developers provide a "90 day refund no-questions asked" refund policy or the like? In any case, it's true: CS does not provide refunds, but on the other hand, I think I have had every one of their products and have never wanted a refund. Expense is subjective, of course, but I agree that it makes sense to wait for one of their sales. Anyway, I've always liked Captain Sim--which puts me in the minority here--and would be happy to help out via PM on any of their jets.

I have only used Mike Ray's 737 Classic book as a manual and would recommend that. I never even downloaded the CS manual. [Heh, as you'll see below, there's a reason for that!] I'm no rivet-counter, but it seems to work well enough to me and is basic Boeing of that era. CS manuals are usually way over-complete, filled with stuff that is not modelled, and I can't say whether they included a tutorial or not. (Wouldn't be surprised if the answer was no.) Ray's book is not cheap ($54 on Amazon) but is nicely spiral bound, entertaining, well-illustrated and sticks to the more important aspects. Whatever complexities you're encountering, Captain Ray will cover them, so CS must have gotten pretty close on their 737. On a more general note, anything with an FMC is pretty intimidating if you're not familiar with it, but once you learn one, you've learned all of them in principle. (I'm assuming that's what you're finding complex, because the rest is pretty straight forward knob twiddling for lateral and vertical control.) I remember struggling to master the FMC until it clicked. EDIT: I saw this on the CS boards, which is too bad. It's ridiculous not to include a tutorial at a minimum. I know CS has described themselves as a "two guys and a truck" operation, but sadly, I think they've been down to one guy and a Vespa for a long time. The RW Boeing 737 manuals are available online and in retail.We do not include any flight ops related manuals into our products anymore. The 757 is, as mentioned, very similar, so you might take a look at the sticky on the FSX VERSION of the 757 section of their boards for orientation on the basics. I see I even made some contributions there back in the day. The 737 has more features through the FMC, but those have more to do with panel states and the like. If anyone finds a CS 737 Classic tutorial floating around, please let us know. Otherwise, I might have to tackle it myself. More than happy to help out in the meantime @Jonmal if you want to PM me.

English is deficient in not having a plural "you." I remember when I learned Arabic it has not only a plural you but a "the two of" you. In Southern Illinois dialect, "you'uns" seemed to be preferred, but you don't hear that nowadays.

Get Wingspan and play online with me. You'd love it. I swear on my honor as a bird with a lock of red hair in its beak. Why that? It was promo art for an urban fantasy book I wrote. Since birds fly, and I always thought it was kind of cool and weird, there it is. I think I'll change it though.

It was a joke. Facebook was famous for cat memes at one time. There has, in fact, been cat-related material posted here. It's part of the personality of Hangar Chat. It was supposed to go, "ha, yeah, but we're famous for cat-related material here." Nothing to do with you or to criticize anyone. I like cats as much as anyone and think it's fun to have a sort of running gag about cat posts in Hangar Chat. But this is why my family keeps the date and location of Thanksgiving dinner a secret from me since 2013: something about inappropriate humor at the table. Me? I'm Tim Capps everywhere, my real name, except when I occasionally pretend to be a Bear for professional reasons. Because if I were anonymous, you think my posts are bad now... I know my limits. I had Top Secret Crypto clearance in the Army Security Agency (which no longer exists as such), 265th ASA Co. 18th Airborne Corps assigned to 101st Airborne / Airmobile Division. I'm not sure of the relevance of that, either, but I'll roll with it. I think I'm a lot more fun as a Bear than a Crow. But now everyone can Google me and discover everything there is to know about me. (Hint: I'm not the dead guy who wrote horse racing mysteries.) I'm pretty sure anyone who wants my information for profit already has it, and I have nothing fear from my friends here. As far as the feds, well, as they say, if you can make the devi your friend, you have a friend indeed. I don't do social media like Facebook or Twitter, although I used to. It's like MSFS vs P3D if that was the only thing in the world to talk about only a million times more bitter. My wife does Facebook and most of the activity ends up deciding who you're going to unfriend, apparently. But, yes, I think this is social media in a broad sense since it brings people together in public discussion and encourages private messaging among like-minded aviation fans all over the world.

What's really weird is I am still on 5.2 and it's been 52 YEARS since the last Beatles album was released. Coincidence? I'm like, but I just listened to Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band last week! So I think, I should be listening to Kid Rock's Bad Reputation, because that's new! I tried it, but, honestly, I think it's just bad. I'm really concerned.

Well, it's been half a year since this thread started. No, wait. It only seems that long. Some roads don't end, they just sort of trickle off into the woods by the river where guys with tattoos are cooking meth. Yes, that was weirdly specific and no, I won't answer questions.

Of course! It's all coming back to me now. :-D

The total absence of cat-related content excludes it from consideration as social media.

Yes. The only reasonable conclusion is that P3D has reached perfection and their work is done. Something this thread will never be. Probably time to just pin at the top.

To even ask this question demonstrates severely misplaced priorities.

Indeed it was. Once JF parted ways with their external dev, I'm pretty sure they (and we) were left with code that was just never going to get fixed. I noticed the same issues with the fuel management in their DC-8 (which were more of a matter of figuring out the secret procedure on your own than being hopelessly bugged). And when you have to download a Tamil font to get an FMC to work, that suggests that there may have been some things left not entirely finished. Every airplane doesn't have to be perfect for me to represent a part of aviation history and enjoy. I'm having a blast with the VC10. In the end, the "new and improved" version that remains on the market is better except for the bugged electrical system. If you're content with CTL-E starts and hurtling to exotic destinations at near the speed of sound in a really nice-looking ride, the version on the market is fine (unless it won't load, which was yours, but not my, experience). Sadly, the option for the non-professional version seems to be abandonware. I would rather deal with lousy lighting (which I can at least mitigate) and less-than-state-of-the-art external graphics than the electrical bug. I just did not want anyone buying the pro version on the belief that the startup problem was unique to me. Every other "The Live" airplane gets a pretty unqualified recommendation from me FWIW. I think the original version of their VC10 is tastier than their extra crispy recipe and wish their support didn't rely on gaslighting. I could be content with several responses, but to just deny they've ever heard of such a thing is weird. In the They (Don't Yet) Live category, a JF in-house project I've been looking forward to would probably avoid these issues, That's their classic 747. The reality is most devs appear to have shifted resources away from P3D and I'm not sure we'll see that now. Well, it's not like we don't have lots of good airplanes to keep us busy in P3D for as long as we want. One way or another, I'm happy to (echoing an old promotional slogan) have tried a little VC10-erness. My long-haul choices will usually still be Just Flight's DC-8, TriStar Professional, and VC10. And there are plenty of other more modern choices to tick other boxes with fewer compromises.

I feel I may have to eat just a tiny bit of, erm, crow after a qualified recommendation of Just Flight's VC10, but let's call it a clarification. The reason it seems as if people are talking about two different airplanes is because, well, they are. I was talking about the Professional version, which does indeed get a lot of things right, as described, and which did--except for the startup--work fine in P3Dv5.2. Maybe I'm just lucky. After banging my head on the Flight Engineer's table for days trying to figure out why I had to suffer the indignity of using CTL-E, along with some very unhelpful "support" exchanges with Just Flight (Follow the tutorial. Follow the tutorial.) I finally figured out (thanks to some people who do not work for Just Flight) that apparently the electrical system, at least in v5, is flat-out bugged, while the standard version is not. The standard version starts fine and works as one would expect for a "lite" version, merrily following a flightplan by Doppler navigation or whatever you want to imagine it doing. (That's the navigator's problem, anyway.) It lacks quite a few amenities like an INS, nice, adjustable lighting, call-outs, and better external graphics, but is still respectable. Plus it starts according to Hoyle. The experience from the left seat is nearly identical. So, as far as I can tell, the Pro looks better and has INS and is generally more polished, but I have to use CTL-E to start it; the standard isn't bugged but doesn't and isn't. Sorry for any confusion.

Besides flight simulation, some of us like games--boardgames even. This one has been around a couple of years and the buzz was so good I finally picked it up at Target when I was with my wife. You don't have to like birds, but with 170 beautifully illustrated bird cards, and extremely high production values, it's hard to imagine anyone not enjoying it. It's not your typical cut-throat competitive game, and a bit hard to describe. There is very little player interaction, for one thing. You can game what's in the old bird feeder a bit, and your bird's power might be triggered by the action of another player, but that's about it. The mechanics are "engine building," which means you're choosing one action per round to get birds, place birds, hunt for food or lay eggs in various environments. Each player even has his own board, or "tableau." Every bird has a value for scoring, but also a "special power" which is actually related to the species. For example, birds of prey can draw another bird from the deck and if its wingspan is small enough, eat it! A similar mechanic is that small flocking birds can tuck other birds behind them to represent numbers, and so many different things go into scoring it's hard to say who's really ahead until the final tally at the end. It's nice to play a game where you don't feel hopelessly behind early. (Love King of Tokyo, but you can be on the sidelines watching other players have fun real fast.) What's cool is you learn a little bit about the birds, and they bear some relation to their real feathered counterparts. Plenty of space for strategy, but it has a very relaxed feel to it, since you're more focused on getting some synergy going, meeting different public and individual goals that vary from game to game, and / or just collecting birds you like. It's the rare game my wife and I can equally enjoy. There are lots of YouTube reviews and playthroughs if you're interested, and lots of stuff at Boardgame Geek. It's a game, a work of art, and while not really simple to learn (none of the usual mechanics). It's not a "gateway game" for the uninitiated but it's not hard once you get your head wrapped around it and it moves fast. The new edition has (cleverly named) SWIFT rules that walk you through programmed instructions. For 2-5 players. Highly recommended. Anybody else tried this?

You got that right! This is a handful once you get up to speed after takeoff. One second you're poking along at 220 kts, then you look away to fiddle with something for a second, and the next thing you know the overspeed warning is going off! Okay (CC: @adam77 too for his input) JF support replied that no one has ever had an issue with starting the VC10. Since I have more faith in this community than JF support, I'm throwing out the complete step-by-step procedure recorded as I completed each per the tutorial. It's pretty clear something goes wrong, and maybe someone can figure it out. (I've also shared this with JF support FWIW.) I am a retired criminal defense lawyer and I'll never get over tracking down every bit of evidence and getting to a verdict. I suspect my near unbroken string will continue: GUILTY of felony buggedness. (Whew, I caught the original charge and changed it before posting! Again, since everything else works, unless you count fuel management, I'm not going to retire it, but if there's a solution, I'd rather have it.) Toggle cold and dark state Set parking brake Confirm HP fuel cocks shut Nav lights on Ground crew activated Open doors Switch off yoke view Turn on No. 1 battery Confirm gull’s eyes in-line Confirm reading of at least 25 volts Set 1 and 2 TRU switches normal Set 4 generator switches (upper electrical panel) normal Set all hydraulic switches to normal / open Check no warning lights on engineer’s panel (ruh roh) Here is the first indication of trouble, because there are a lot of warning lights on, and here is the list. Engine: 4 bus fail Upper electrical: 4 generator fail Lower electrical: ground power (NOTE: I am on battery, so it should be on, but I have tried uisng ground power and it doesn’t make any difference); main 1 & 2 DC supply fail Airframe anti-ice: 2 Stub o/ht; duct fail; o/ht Air: 4 air red; 4 air lights (below that) amber; 2 NVR amber; 2 red (above); mass flow ctl (?) auto off 4 amber; radio fans amber Hydraulics: 8 LP amber; 1 isol Continuing with tutorial steps: Fasten seat belts & no smoking Stall identification set 1 Verify gear down 3 greens Check fuel Tune nav radios Select VOR/LOC Close doors Remove ground equipment Beacon on Pitot head heaters on Toggle ground air supply (hear flow) Open No. 3 LP fuel cock Confirm gull’s eye in-line Both fuel pumps tank 3 on HP fuel cock lever on pedestal for no. 3 all the way forward to start Master selector knob on engineer’s table LP start Starter light on Ignitor lights on Now no. 3 should start to turn, but the green rotation light does not come on and engine doesn’t turn. Not sure of relevance, but in the military version, the APU start light just blinks when pushed, but APU never starts.. However, right now I’m concerned with the civilian models.

You can find pictures of GPS in a lot of old airplanes--Aeroplane Heaven even has the option of adding Reality XP into their C-46 and I have watched Ice Pilots! (I have to admit it is awesome in the Dassault Falcon, though.) EAL did have GPS retrofitted into their One Elevens, but they were text only (no map) and I don't know if they were connected to the autopilot or not. I suspect it was a regulatory thing and convenient, but radio navigation was still the primary means of getting around. That would be an interesting mod. I have read where even INS equipped airplanes used radio navigation when they could. The Total Overhaul Mod for the Captain Sim 737-200 does include an option to install the GTN750 where the weather radar is, and if you have the RealityXP the installer will do it for you! (My cargo versions have been retrofitted with that option.) If the CIVA INS from SimuFly were 100% in v5 that would be interesting indeed, but I don't have the technical skills to do more than a straightforward gauge swap. It would be a great option for many planes that used them. Little guys like the One Eleven, though, aren't going to be out of range of a VOR (at least for very long) and it's probably less of a hassle to tune radios than fool with an INS on short routes. As always, to each his own. But I'll probably download the 64 bit version and see what mischief I can get up do some day when I'm bored.

Pretty sure the answer is no, unfortunately.

EDIT: Just realized this is weirder than I thought, so I'm going to ponder it a bit before asking.

The only variable in my scenario was that I redownloaded it from SimMarket. I don't think the difference between v5.2 and v5.3 should make a difference, but who knows? Sorry it didn't work for you. There may be mods that address this.

Passengers boarding BAC One Eleven's integral stairs. VC10 landing at Montreal.

Well, the BAC was your idea 🙂 Thanks, buddy! And thanks for filling the missing information on the One Eleven.

As a follow-on to my first They Live post, I wanted to pass along a couple of others I've been enjoying a lot. David Maltby's BAC-111 I'll admit it. I've always turned my nose up at freeware. Why bother with some amateurish effort when you can fly a polished payware airplane? This one proves how stupid that attitude is. So, the graphics are "dated?" There is so much to this project that I stopped noticing the retro 2D look after about five minutes. In fact, I think the photoreal collage of gadgets works exceptionally well in this early jet. Why have I uninstalled Just Flight's slowpoke One Eleven and flown the heck out of this DMFS classic? I think "rewarding" is the best single word answer. The One Eleven's design is a bit eccentric by modern standards, but once you get your head wrapped around the logic, it just works. One example is engine overheating. We don't worry much about that with more modern jets but abuse those low-bypass Speys and they'll flat quit on you. Hot, high take-offs, or--horrors--hot and high, mean you're going to have to do some serious babysitting. Don't worry. Depending on the model, the One Eleven gives you the medicine you need for baby's frequent fevers. Like "top temp" (which won't let you jam the throttles forward) to a refreshing shower of cool water for overheated engines! Automation is simple and work-intensive but reliable (like any 60s jet) or sophisticated and reliable in the 510ED, which will even do an autoland! (Of course, it's all radio navigation.) It even has unexpected amenities like a chinagraph that gives you your speeds when you click on it. Same for your 100% power rating given takeoff conditions. (Remember, very important for temperature-sensitive engines.) Aside from the "dated" graphics (again, a non-issue for me) the only thing that bothered me was squishy suspension. Don't know the reason there, but if you have A2As Accu-Feel, it's easy to stiffen it so I don't have to worry about scraping a wingtip. Plus, you can add rattles and squeals to reflect an old jet that was still in hush-kitted service into the 21st century. There are also many liveries available, equally dated, of course, but some very pretty. (I even learned little Air Illinois out of my home airport KMDH flew two of these old Britjets in the 80s. Amazing where they turned up.) They are perfect for those classic British inclusive tours holiday destinations in the Med. Wherever you fly, the DMFS BAC One Eleven will reward good captains and punish the bad and there's never a dull moment. I created an FSSpotlights file to cure the "nuke in the cockpit" effect of turning on the landing lights. (A vice not limited to freeware, by the way) and wound up using every lamp available. Personally, I think it looks better at night than a lot of payware now. Currently my very favorite airplane. Just Flight VC10 Professional Despite a "Battlefield Earth" movie reference below, I like this one and can give a qualified endorsement. I took a flyer on this v4 airplane and couldn't even get it to load in v5. But several months later, I redownloaded it and reinstalled and it works fine in 5.2. (A qualified "fine" as you'll see). I have no explanation and can't make any promises. I asked JF about it and just got one of their cryptic shrugs. I hope for the sake of their 747 classic I'm wrong, but it seems they're so over P3D. The VC10 was another brilliant "failure" that has--much like the L1011--retained legendary status despite a lack of economic success. It was a fast but rugged design suited for Her Majesty's far-flung airports for which the 707 and DC-8 were too fastidious. That explains the curious engine mounting, monster truck tires, short stocky legs and iconic enormous T-tail. But during its relatively short heyday it got a lot of use by BOAC and BA all over the world. It famously held the subsonic transatlantic crossing record into the 21st century. So how does Just Flight's version measure up? About like you would expect from their "Professional Line." I'm not really damning it with faint praise, just calibrating expectations. It's gorgeous inside and out and flies well. Like its little One Eleven cousin more favorably reviewed above, things seem a bit weird at first, and it took me quite a bit of test piloting before I was confident. I won't say "study," because the manual is skimpy. More like Jonnie teaching himself to fly a Harrier in Battlefield Earth. There are two useful tutorials, one from Heathrow to Prestwick that uses radio navigation, then a second leg to Montreal featuring the INS. Unsurprisingly for JF, the engineer's panel remains an intriguing mystery box. I could never get it started using the published procedure, so it's CTL-E for me. Since everything except pumping the yoke was handled by the engineer or navigator, that doesn't bother me too much. (The engineer even has his own throttle quadrant.) I would like to manage the fuel, but the manual's no help, and I can't make sense of things like why the fuel from the fin tank gets used despite fuel cocks closed and pumps off. There's an "automatic fuel management" feature, though. So, the engineer is back there doing his own thing and doesn't want me messing with his stuff. Fair enough, I guess. I could complain that I'd expect more for the price, except I'm estopped because it's not supported in v5. If it's the same in v4, I suppose I would complain a bit. Maybe it's all hunky dory in v4, or others have solved the mysteries. In any case, none of this stops me from liking it a lot. Once you figure out how to use the autopilot to defeat the Psychlos--I mean fly to Prestwick--the INS is a pretty standard representation and works as expected for a lighter version. I was a little disappointed that it does not model DME updating, which is a step backwards from their TriStar. There is a way to keep your API down by punching some buttons for any VOR that's part of your plan, which is a bit lame. But coupled with a lack of fuel management (at least as far as I can figure out) there's not a lot to do in cruise except update your nine INS waypoints once or twice, depending on the length of your route. A word about that automation. It's tricky, and the automatic throttle seems too laggy to keep up with any but the most gentle changes. Treated gingerly, it will level off at a set altitude and speed. But I turn the thing off a lot of the time, especially on descent, when it doesn't seem to want to go to idle. Maybe this is all realistic. Personally, I think airspeed is too important to trust to automation at all times. What does seem odd is the anemic climb, but, again, I'm no expert. Let's just say I crashed a lot of VC10s before I learned better. It comes with the usual JF apron toys, but GSX is also an option with two caveats: watching a GSX stair roll up to the rear door just behind those gorgeous swept wings is harrowing, and there's no working service doors. Solution: map it for your catering truck anyway and cover your eyes. In the end, it all works and I enjoy it. In fact, it's my go-to long-haul airplane now. After all the negatives I've mentioned, why? It's one of the most beautiful airliners ever made, in my opinion, and there's certainly no objections to the way it JF made it look or the number of liveries included. It's a fascinating piece of history, and I'm a sucker for classic jets. And it's as fast as it looks. Without it, I probably would never have been motivated to learn just how big Africa really is or how cool the green strip of the Nile looks from 38,000 feet or research a colorful chapter in aviation history. (Imagine being in a flight crew and having regular layover poolside drinks with Idi Amin.) Because hit instant replay after landing, hop into the tower, and you won't find a cooler show. So, with fewer options for P3D, discovering what still works is important (for me at least). Here's a couple of British classics--one with short legs and another with long--and one of them won't even cost a dime. I'm very happy to have both.

Thanks. It worked. Obviously, this is going to have to be a familiar part of my toolkit going forward.