Oracle427

The trees at the south end of my airport are very close to 50 feet tall and less than 100 feet from the end of a 2900 foot long runway. I do not find that the flight runways are unrealistic.Keep your speed in check and use throttle to control your glide path and you'll get down safely. http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=40.947524444,-74.314501389&t=h&z=16

I had to answer the DLC question so I put yes, because I don't know better.Also on the other DLC question put the option, none. I don't want cars, ships, trucks, etc.Thanks!

I'd like to know the answer to that as well, because I can run through the general flows I would use in a C172 I'm these unfamiliar aircraft. FSX doesn't model every piece of equipment either, so I can't use my checklist. It still doesn't diminish the quality of the sim.Aside from not bring able to check the operation of the autopilot, servo trim, RAIM and automated weather, what else are you looking for? A C 172?I am able to interact with the instruments the same way in flight. I know the field elevation, so I still check the altimeter. I can still tune the radios (and use them!)Try the 6A checkout mission and tell me that isn't fairly close to what the real steps would be for an engine start.FSX does not require one to do these things any more than flight does. So if one has the discipline to run through their flows and checklists they still can. The panel switches and knobs are all there waiting to be clicked.To the best of my knowledge FSX is not approved to log time without significant investment inn hardware and add ons. A flight school could use it to help train their students, but I do not believe that time can be logged as anything other than ground time.

Fire the balloon guy! LOL

It is indeed terrible to treat your passengers that way. I know someone that actually had a flashlight get wedged behind the rudder pedals and it didn't even require dangerous manuevers like that to do it.

I'll take the bait.welcome aboard! Aircraft behave somewhat differently than a rocket because of their wings.When an aircraft attempts to make a sudden change in direction at a high speed few things can happen.1 the aircraft stalls and essentially begins to fall down. If you.re already in a dive, you'll keep going down. This may actually be a good thing because of #22 the airframe will be overstressed from the extreme forces and break apart catastrophically.3 the airframe holds together and the pilot losses conscious the extreme g forces.4 the airplane pulls put of the dive.flight isn't modeling #2 yet. I'm not sure about 3being modeled either.Finally I have no idea how well the Stearman is modeled. But I do have a pilot at my airport that owns one and I've observed takeoffs and landings and climbs while flying in the pattern with him or on the ground. The performance seems to be fairly close in Flight.

You mean like this?

Prop aircraft have a few phenomena that generally create left turning tendencies. You will need to use the rudder to counteract this tendency to fly in a straight path.You can expect this effect to be strongest when these conditions exist.SlowHigh powerhigh angle of attack

I think our voices are a good form of currency.

I'm not sure what you mean about the starting location. You can choose where you want to start from, but you can't choose a particular ramp. I wish you could...The flight "planning" tool in FSX, was just building a nav log. It wasn't taking winds aloft or tc, th, mc, mh into account iirc. I never used it because of this, because it isn't the way a real flight would be planned.you can do that yourself using the map flight provides in a few minutes, or you could go online and use a free tool that provides similar results to the FSX one to use in the Sim. Skyvector.com comes to mind.I just punched in a route from phto to phmu in there and it gave me a magnetic heading of 285 TC of 296, 38.9 NM for 21.2 minutes at a gs of 107kts.I see no reason why these tools should be built into flight when the real ones work just fine and are free.If you want the airport info its all on there too.

On the issue of complexity... FSX did not offer anything besides weather parameters for VFR planning. In flight it is impossible to plan a flight thanks to the complete lack of weather data. Are you searching for more complex aircraft or for structure around how you use the tool?It also doesn't mean all that much when the distances are so short and there are no landmarks to use over the ocean in Flight.I don't see how the current tools in flight (weather aside) don't offer one the same degree of complexity that prior Sims offered. My biggest gripe besides weather is a lack of systems failures.You can still shoot approaches and navigate by dead reckoning or radio.

I'll qualify this post by saying that simulating heavies does not appeal to me. I'm only interested in "GA"aircraft. I do not see how Flight can possibly deliver the functionality required to support a simulation for "heavies" either.My observation is that MS had provided a product that is a foundation for their open ended development. The direction taken entirely depends on the community. It isn't a finished product so it is going to be very difficult to judge what we will get in the future.Speaking of community, I'm happy that the engine makes it so easy to fly with other humans and not get stick with AI aircraft that don't follow basic procedures. I can see that our small community has a diversity of views and goals. Overall, I am surprised to see how many want to fly heavies. the single biggest improvement and the main reason I have all but stopped using FSX and X Plane were because both have enough holes in their flight modeling to be counter productive in my training. FSX was always terrible at take offs and landings and slow flight.ever try to get the nose wheel of the ground for a soft field takeoff?X Plane is even quirkier in slow flight, and while it "feels" more realistic, I can't find a payware C172 that performs by the numbers. They climb like tickets and don't slow down when configured for approach. Why would I pay for that?Neither of those Sims handles forward slips very well either.All the eye candy, AI aircraft, the buggy and unrealistic ATC, or a zillion destinations to go to, didn't and still don't matter to me because the base flight simulation was flawed in important areas.So then we get Flight. The balloon and yacht mission, followed by the coin challenges almost broke the deal for me. I was ready to delete Flight and give up on these PC products. Then I discovered the landing challenges and realized that Flight delivered improvements in the areas I've been looking for.Like I've said in other posts, I have no idea if the performance is by the numbers as in the POH for these aircraft, but when I get around to it I'm going to compare it. My gut tells me that it's going to be close based on what I'm seeing so far.The product absolutely has problem areas such as a lack of useful wind socks. What the heck happened to the Track IR support? No l/r brake, trim axis support are big ones to leave out. I am concerned about these not being added in soon and for free. I will miss not being able to build my own scenery, but I really don't mind that as much.Anyway, to make a long post longer, I think that we got a GA Sim foundation here that needs a little shoring up, but it can get really good with some new content and geography. The community is going to drive the success or failure.

If we meet up online, I'll be happy to participate and help practice. The biggest issue I ran into tonight is that we don't have tail numbers on the aircraft, so I figure that I'll just have to use my real one. :)I'm just shy of 65 hours, passed the written and ready to take my checkride. :)That sounds like great progress for 6 hours. I soloed at around 30. My runway is only 40 feet wide and ~2400 feet long due to the displaced thresholds so it took a while to get comfortable with crosswind landings. :)I was very concerned about the radio work in the beginning of the training. The fear was unjustified! I found that I didn't have to dedicate much time to learning the radio work (hit the books and hit them early, absorb that info like a sponge!). Communicating with flight following, flight watch, the towers and CTAF advisories in uncontrolled areas isn't all that bad once you get into the routine, get comfortable with your flows and get your head out of the cockpit and improve your SA. I think you'll be very well prepared doing your training in this airspace. The biggest "annoyance" I have is that sometimes NY approach is very busy so you can barely get a word in with them, and sometimes they are too busy to provide VFR following.Are you operating out of a towered field? I am flying out of N07 (untowered). If you're using a towered field, you're probably already ahead of the game on the radio work. I was never endorsed to fly into the NY Bravo, but frankly, I'm not worried if tomorrow I was asked by my instructor to request a clearance from NY approach into the Bravo.

Weird, is there a bug with text chat?! :(

Friend request sent. Could you hear my voice comms or see my text chat while I was in your game?

The funny part of the review is that they focused on everything that I think 80% of flight simmers are going to ignore. I'm not going to ding IGN as a whole, but their reviewer got this one totally wrong.I find the flight model in Flight to feel very real, but I don't know if it is "by the numbers" the way FSX was. I noticed that there are some RV-6A pilots on these forums and I wonder if they are finding that Flight is faithful to the real aircraft.I never looked to live out an artificial "Story" or a "Career" in a Flight Simulator. I can play GTA for that LOL.I love this line, "there arguably isn't much to hold long-term interest other than to experience the joy of landing, taking off, sitting in the cockpit, and enjoying the scenery." Umm I think that's the point!The community aspect is just starting to take off right here. That In my biggest opinion is what makes or breaks any enterprise these days.

More lift = more dragMore drag != more lift

Then what makes you think they'd listen to a"tower"? :(Unfortunately, in a public server I think you'll get clowns that don't care about anyone else. The approach for un towered airports will work better in my opinion. All the pilots have to do is announce their position in the pattern or approaching the field.

I know the control towers give me grief and ask me to expedite my exit if I land long and miss the first taxi way. :(I would think that it is always wise to use the runway effectively by touching down as early as possible without compromising safety of course.

Personal limits and plain good ADM aside, are you sure that the actual crosswind component exceeds the limit of the 6A in that challenge? None of the non DLC challenges introduced crosswinds that were beyond the limits. I also found the amount of correction required to feel rather close to reality.

In order to find info on what radial to intercept to get to an airport from a VOR, you should check the FAA website for the A/FD. Search for the airport you want and you will find appropriate info near the bottom of that airports info.It will give you the name of the Nav aid, a distance and a radial if it is a VOR.A/FD = Airport and Facility DirectoryThe info can be cryptic, but you get used to it very quickly if you read the legend.Also note that VHF is blocked by terrain. It is not uncommon for a VOR to lack coverage for certain arcs and altitudes. This is something that UHF gets around, though it is not as accurate due to interference or as long ranged.

Chock,What a magical moment that must have been. It gives me goosebumps thinking about it.Of course the bird was probably thinking, "You came here in that thing? You're braver than I thought!" Hehe.

... and that is the reason why complex is another endorsement (that I don't have... yet!). I can see how the C/S braking behavior on the 6A would get one in a lot of trouble if they are used to F/P.

I don't even get names around the other aircraft! :Hug:I answered my own question. I had to restart the program for the names to show up. Now if I can get someone to answer me on voice comms to confirm that it is working.

I have noticed in other players video grabs that they have circles around the other player aircraft. I can't seem to enable this assuming it must be enabled in the first place. I normally fly with all the aids turned off, but I tried enabling all the aids tonight without luck.Now that I have been flying on multiplayer for a few days, I have encountered enough kamikazes on the ground or in the air that I would like a some help spotting and avoiding them.