Jump to content


Inactive Members
  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

76 Good

About BilboBaggins

  • Rank
  • Birthday 01/01/1929

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. That will be awesome! The Milviz F86 is nicely done, the cockpit has incredible feel and it flies like a monster; I'm sure Belsimtek's will be all that and more, in the DCS World!
  2. Believe it or not, I just landed at ORBX YMML v2.0 in the Carenado Embraer Phenom 100 WITHOUT CONTACTING AIRCRAFT CONTROL.... horrors! And I parked diagonally at Gate D11 instead of lining up with the straight lines! OMG! Even though I do know how to do all that correctly if I wish. I even PAUSED THE SIM while in the air to dial in the Direct-To, find the airport and the runway ILS frequency, push a few buttons to enter it into VOR1, etc..... WHILE PAUSED! TOTALLY UNREALISTIC! ARREST THIS INSURGENT, NOW! I'm sure there are those out there looking for training and certification and full-fledged professional-world practice on fully accurate systems simulations, or find nothing short of that impossible to contemplate. I'm not a fan of the Cleveland Symphony, preferring the Vienna Philharmonic, myself. But the eight of you aren't the only ones in the world, either. Some of us know how to have fun other ways, and are perfectly content to do so, and don't consider it utter tragedy if heck, we have to listen to the Cleveland Symphony tonight because the flights to Vienna are too pricey at the moment due to skyrocketing fuel costs. If that's even an apt rough analogy, since I'm sure the other Phenoms aren't PERFECT, either. Further: I'm not willing at this point to even take a look on a webpage at any other Phenom; the acid rejections of everything except the Club's utter insistence on their version of "truth" have pretty much permanently soured me (and, I'm sure, others) on that possibility. So consider that, too.
  3. Well, I'm having too much fun flying the Carenado Phenom 100 to really care what a few people here think, because of a couple of tiny features they're all OCD about and have decided is the absolute make-or-break regarding whether an add-on is Worthy of Their Approval, or Utter Trash (there is apparently nowhere in-between). I just check in every now and then to see whether the beatings here have continued; and yes, they have.
  4. Sorry to have participated. I'll let the club intent on using any reference to Carenado's Phenom as an excuse to advertise the perfection of Feelthere's or Justflight's (who as a result I will never buy anything from now, btw) have their way. Funny how that works. Good luck with your marketing campaign for old software. May you get 2 more buyers.
  5. I suspect this is proving to be their best-selling add-on in a long time, and for good reason! What a beauty.
  6. I remember really digging into the original SU27 Flanker -- and I mean the version that SSI released in the US a thousand years ago, I think one of the first things Eagle Dynamics did (at least that was sold). While at the time Falcon 4.0 was getting all the visibility, I was absolutely shocked -- for back then -- at how sophisticated the flight engine, the rendering engine and the overall system was. Layer on top of that a mission generating/editing system that was completely cutting edge, and AI that was the same (at a time when F4's AI was a joke), and, well.... it was massive. And here we are many years later. I've almost been afraid to get back into DCS because I know any ONE of the modules released is a lifetime of practice, training, mastery and detail, and even then, there's almost more than one human being can absorb; OTOH life is short and I had to give it another spin. The control input configuration stuff is absolutely top-notch as well, the customization is highly detailed, light-years ahead of anything else (well except maybe the TM Warthog). And the helicopters are using real-world physics _and_ a variety of internal simulations -- a direction A2A has pioneered for FSX -- that go well beyond the usual variant-of-core-FDE that's possible in the latter system (sophisticated as it is, make no mistake about that, either). And you really feel it when flying, with all the particulars of helicopter performance that aren't faked the way they tend to be in FSX. I'm really amazed people on the Eagle Dynamics forums complain about anything -- well, it's a massively complicated, detailed system that's been evolving for literally decades -- and I'm sure there are those who are totally hardcore about the online multiplayer enough for every little thing to matter to the utmost degree. Anyways, absolutely not to be overlooked, as I have for so long (well, intimidated is a better word! <G>). Steve
  7. BTW picked this up the other day, and FINALLY have a helicopter simulation I can believe in! After so many years. No fundamental compromises. Thank You.
  8. Has anyone on this thread tried the following suggestion from the MS kb? It's for Win8.1 but may apply to 8 as well: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2900614
  9. Not to be ghoulish but if the pilots had been rendered unconscious quickly by toxic inhalation or smoke inhalation, a slumping body over the controls might be an explanation for an inexplicable climb or turn.
  10. Most likely something like this occurred: http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20110729-0 Accidents happen, no matter how good the safety record, maintenance, pilot diligence and crew and logistics planning and preparation.
  11. I am going with alien abduction (short enough for yea) :ph34r: No, I can positively rule that one out. We gave that up around 1957. Nothing really interesting discovered except that, hoo-boy, evolution was not at all kind to life on this planet. Once we get the robots to the right level, we'll invite you all to migrate and life will be a lot simpler!
  12. Oh well, I'll play one more round: 1. Continue to believe it's vanishingly unlikely this was any kind of hijacking. There is simply insufficient evidence to support that claim at this point, anything being defined as "evidence" is extremely speculative at best, and will have a large variety of possible explanations, the vast majority of them not pernicious. 2. IF, however, there is any remote chance that a plane COULD have been captured this way, it is incumbent upon the investigators to search until they prove that has not happened. Simple risk management. If the possibility is there, it is necessary to rule it out, given the consequences of what might happen if it were the case. 3. A third, and I think more shadowy and honestly, to me more nerve-wracking remote possibility is that IF this was a hijacking, it was "simply" a practice run, an attempt to see -- without expectation or plan of any kind to achieve actual success -- whether such a scenario would be feasible, and what would work, and what wouldn't. I wouldn't put it past the kind of terrorists involved in the past in such events to be thinking that way, and to be gladly willing to sacrifice a few troops to test the theory as a foundation for future planning. Such an inhuman experiment would reach a logical conclusion by actively burying the evidence where it'd be virtually impossible to find, deep in the Indian Ocean. Now, who would want to do that, and for what geopolitical reason, is completely up in the air. Belarus jokes that it's a US plot, others joke it's a Russian plot to distract, some could just as reasonably argue North Korea did it to punish China for upbraiding them recently; none of these or other possibilities, including the Ayatollah With a Nuke, can be ruled out. Nevertheless, I still consider them all highly unlikely. The Chinese economy is beginning to soften; Ukraine could easily turn into Greece/Spain/Portugal, another EU state financially enslaved to massive debt owned by the Dutch and Germans, with similar mass unemployment and political instability; Syria is a pit of long-term despair and chaos; Israel is on tenterhooks about Iran; the whole Middle East is in turmoil. Reality as well is that a lot of political, social and economic unease could be early consequences of global warming, with resource shortages driving chaos in those regions most immediately sensitive to upcoming possibly more radical changes. And then there's the 2014 election in the US, with a good history in this country of those in the past taking desperate measures to tilt world events in favor of their cause. The US military is radically downsizing, and there are big contractors as well as big states with big economies affected by that fact. Given all of the above, there are any one of a number of theories one could propose about a group, or organization, or corporate conspiracy, or government, or partisan extremist religious fanatic cause, wanting to precipitate chaos with something like this, or worse, if "this is just a test." So, that's all theorizing, too, and I will hope it's as farcical as everything else I've seen in the past few weeks; the sad thing is, it's equally as plausible.
  13. Ummm.... all my software is registered, my licensing/ownership rights are on file with either the online retailer I've purchased from or (in PMDG's case, for instance) the originating company that made the software (if I'm purchasing direct). That's as it should be, and the information is all there should there ever be the need to review it (which in my case would be laughably unlikely). It's not a conspiracy, it's just good bookkeeping.
  14. One of the things I like about my ancient iPad 1 is that it's slow, so when I start up the AP News app, say, it takes awhile to refresh from headlines from a day or a few days before. It's an ongoing education in how quickly the drama of each day's news stories fade to nothing. Thoreau was right about that, in Walden. I'm mostly concerned about the effect the media coverage is having on the agonies of the families who've lost loved ones. But, there's nothing I can do about that, so there's not much to say there.
  15. I continue to think that if the climb and descent was intentional, it fits with Goodfellow's discussion since I'd imagine the pilots would try to "starve" a fire in a non-pressurized space on the plane to attempt to put it out, if they could do so while maintaining cabin integrity.
  • Create New...