NickATC

Members
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About NickATC

  • Birthday May 14

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    SKPE
  • Interests
    Well.. pretty much everything that includes planes and radar screens.

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    IVAO
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

About Me

  • About Me
    RL Air Traffic controller. Navigation and RT instructor.
  1. NickATC

    Favorite Single-engine FSX add-on

    Other possible planes: From A2A: C172, PA28 or the Comanche. Too slow for my liking... but on videos they look amazing. They include failures and maintenance. Very professional. There is a freeware C150 somewhere. I remember it is a french web page. If you are interested, I can look it for you. Let me know. Maintenance has to be performed and it has accumulative wear on the engine... not as elaborated as A2A, but it freeware :smile:
  2. NickATC

    Favorite Single-engine FSX add-on

    Lancair Legacy made by RealAir Simulations. :wink: I haven't found anything as well simulated for a GA plane. Its version 2 is awesome. Worth evey penny. Just my 2 cents.
  3. Thank you, sir. I like planes with some realism... I'll google that company. EDIT: it's only for X-Plane ... I'm a FSX and P3D user
  4. Just to avoid confusion, which developer designed that B727??
  5. NickATC

    Near Milford Sound in dusk

    Awesome shots!!! :smile: Is that P3D ?? FSX?? FS9 ?? LOL
  6. NickATC

    Looking for an Airline Manager sim\game

    airwaysim.com fee is 0.1 Euro/USD per day. I used this one loooong time ago: http://www.airlinemogul.com Not sure how realistic since I don't own a real airline hehehehe... sorry I couldn't resist :wink: It's free.... so it's worth a try.
  7. NickATC

    Your Favorite Utility

    Hello, there! I use FSCaptain. It's engaging, challenging, and continously updated. Now I never fly without it. As for weather engines, I use REX essential with overdrive. Not hard on FPS and gives a nice touch of realism. I also use Accu-Feel. I only use FSX, but may work with P3D. Check the video. I hope you find what calls your attention. I've been a flight simmer... and still find amazing things on these threads Nick
  8. NickATC

    Current Aircraft in Preview Screen

    When I have the same issue in FS9, I press CTRL+ENTER...this command changes the screen from full screen to windowed mode. Not sure if it works, but worth a try.
  9. NickATC

    Realair duke b60 v2

    I asked the same but about the Turbine Duke. Developers answered YES... but you have to direct the installer to the folder where the FSX SE lies. Contact the developers for a direct answer.
  10. "We are all very ignorant. What happens is that not all ignore the same things." Einstein I saw it somewhere... and continue writing it as I read it. This is what happens when English is not your native language :wink: Anyway, I hope that this small typos do not affect the thread LOL
  11. This is my personal and humble opinion. Simmers sometimes are too strict and hard on their own procedures. If you guys saw aircraft making IFR procedures on radar screens, you would be amazed on how they look versus what we simmers expect. Don't get me wrong. People think that IRL intercepting a radial is easy... and that pilots intercept and follow it without think. But the reality is very different. And in this point, I can see 4 different groups of pilots. Let me explain. Group 1. Those pilots that have FMS. Everyhting looks perfect: Holdings, archs, SIDs, STARs, routes. One word to describe their procedures? Perfect! Group 2. The same pilot that has FMS, but due to traffic has to make quick changes to their paths, and has to do everything with autopilot. I sometimes see that they have to follow heading an altitude instructions (vectors) and then resume their own navigation. And the perfectness one sees on group 1, starts to become more like a real pilot. The holding is not that perfect... the radial tracking is more obvious since they try to follow a radial and one can see small corrections to maintain on a certain radial. Two words to describe their procedures? Looks good! Group 3. Those who fly IFR but with no AP. There are some flight schools and some charter companies that don't have AP on their planes and yet the fly IFR. And I can see how they follow the STARS, and then radial interception. And this is how flying IFR is, IMHO. That is how tracking a radial looks: the radial is track... displaced by wind.. then return to radial and correct for wind... again displaced by wind, back to the radial, more heading. Now it was too much heading. return to the radial.. and bingo!!... the pilot found the GOLDEN HEADING to follow the radial. What about entering the holding?? pretty much the same. What about an arch?? It's not perfect. But the pilot remains withing the 0.5nm. I like to check how group 3 pilots do their procedures. And it's nice to see that their procedures is not far from your elliptical arch, wipeout01. They look the same. Group 4. Those who are beginning to fly IFR. A friend of mine asked me to check his radar tracks... and also asked me for my opinion on his first IFR flight. And I told him: 'You had a hard time maintaing the radial, didn't you?' His response was really interesting. He said that following his first radial was really hard. That wind moved this aircraft too much.. .and that the GOLDEN HEADING that he found on flight sim changed all the time up there. So... moral?? in flight sim, some things are easier that in the real plane up there. To sum up. The fact that you see a perfect arch in a navigation chart, doesn't mean that it has to be a perfect arch with 0% error. No. That's not what happens in RL. In fact, when I took a small course on IFR Procedures, I could see that every procedure (arch, holding, route, SID, STAR, etc... you name it) has a certaind degree of expected error from the pilot. And NDB procedure is far less precise than a VOR procedure. That's for sure. Even an ILS has some tolerances, because it is expect that errors can be made during the IFR execution. So... Take it easy... maintain the legal limits, and you are going to be fine.
  12. And that is how it works. With no wind, attack every radial with 90°, but as wind affects my flight, sometimes 90 is not going to work. I've applied angles of 110°... just to maintain my 90° course. So, you are doing it fine... believe me! To make a perfect arch sometimes is not possible. Small deviations take you away from the distance determined in the procedure. Look at this photo. It's a real photo of an airliner making an 11DME arch. Can you see current distance from the VOR to the plane?? that is 11.4 DME... not the 11 stated on the procedure. Do not forget that this arch was not made by the pilot, but by the FMS (computer on board that corrects for wind and other variables) But as long as the pilot is within the 0.5 in or out of the perfect arch, he will be ok. http://imageshack.com/a/img922/4066/6yTtnL.jpg What you are trying to do is a very complicated thing. Just picture this: If you have a wind, let's say, 360° 17kts, and you make any arch, the wind will affect you different as you fly the arch! You will have to make very accurate calculations to determine the Wind Correction Angle to know how to adjust heading to the new radial to cut... and that is assuming the wind will remain steady, which in my humble opinion is far from the real world. If you manage to stay within the limits the FAA or your country's aviation authority, you can feel proud of yourself. Just making an arch within the legal limits is already a hard thing to do. Trying to maintain a perfect arch is something I'd like my students to do. If you, or any pilot find the way to do it, let me know... I'd like to learn how to do it. So, just relax, Wipeout01, maintain within the limits and that's it. If you are doing it this way, kudos to you!
  13. NickATC

    Taking FS to another level!

    What about this? http://www.virtual-cpdlc.com/
  14. NickATC

    What's your day job?

    ATC and flight instructor.
  15. Just FYI, the 217° radial is neither the first radial to cut nor is where the 7dme arc begins... it is the radial in which the 56 dme arc begins... As I stated in my previous post, the first radial to cut is not described in the chart. WTH!! 56dme arc!!??? :mad: 'Tower, I request to fly direct to... ' LOL