Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on October 28, 2010, 05:01:35 pm
This thread is to discuss when and where to meet to fly legs online (be it IVAO or VATSIM)
Starting wtih leg 3...
I plan to fly it tomorrow, friday the 29th, time is flexible, from 12.00z to 20.00z I'll be available to fly on IVAO.
Who ever is interested to do the flight online, write below with your schedule, the sooner the better so we can agree on a start time (I shoud have created this thread some days ago already I realize)
See you in the sky!
Post by: EHM-2589 David on October 28, 2010, 05:32:12 pm
Post by: EHM-1997 Alexander on October 28, 2010, 06:02:37 pm
Flight Logger 4 should do this as Murray re-flew a leg earlier this week.
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 28, 2010, 06:07:06 pm
Post by: EHM-2589 David on October 28, 2010, 06:18:24 pm
Post by: EHM-1997 Alexander on October 28, 2010, 06:52:58 pm
I certainly did refly Leg 2, but didn't bother with attempting to record it as an ordinary flight.
Ah, in this case you may not be able to log the flight hours when re-flying then. I think it would have to be in the non-event timetable for this to be possible.
Although if the propilot portion fails on flogger 4 it will be submitted as a non pp flight with flight time and then you can refly it as pp again.
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on October 28, 2010, 09:34:47 pm
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on October 28, 2010, 09:49:08 pm
I'll keep an eye out for you guys on IVAO.
8)
Post by: EHM-1829 Trevor on October 29, 2010, 12:44:28 am
I have been working back shift this week finishing at 23:00hrs, so won't be able to make Friday evening :( , but hope to catch you all on leg4.
Good idea with the thread Mariano ;)
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 29, 2010, 09:13:20 am
Hi Folks
I have been working back shift this week finishing at 23:00hrs, so won't be able to make Friday evening :( , but hope to catch you all on leg4.
Good idea with the thread Mariano ;)
I'm probably good for Friday 19:00Z or a little after (or definitely Saturday if you want company Trevor). Still haven't tested voice under X-IVAP, so it'd useful to have a really quick voice session before or during.
UPDATE: Whether I make it or not, make sure the first pilot ready files a formation flight, that way you can all fly in one block on the same route with only one pilot having to talk to ATC ;) (Haven't done a formation in ages, but generally speaking first pilot uses "<callsign> plus <others>, blah", where <callsign> is the first pilot's callsign and <others> is the number of other planes in the formation, so "EHM-0654 plus 3, all Twin Otter, VFR to Canyonlands, request departure from active to the north".
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on October 29, 2010, 01:00:37 pm
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 29, 2010, 01:13:32 pm
Post by: EHM-1997 Alexander on October 29, 2010, 01:20:46 pm
Tempted though if its likely there'll be no controllers.
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 29, 2010, 01:43:51 pm
Flying online (even with controllers) is easy and fun at all but the most busy departure airports (where the majority of the workload for the pilot is). Until you feel comfortable with the whole online flying experience, just put "RMK/NEW PILOT" (or "RMK/IVAO NEWBIE" ;)) in your remarks and everyone will be extra patient with you. Plus, VFR GA, you don't need to talk to the controllers all that much; just a call to tower to say you want to depart, and a call to tower at the other end to say you want to join the circuit (and eventually, land).
Post by: EHM-1997 Alexander on October 29, 2010, 08:14:40 pm
I've grabbed Ivap for x-plane and ts2, although I assume that the ivao software will control ts from my nav frequency.
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 29, 2010, 10:10:18 pm
Learned a few things about X-IVAP (which is nice) and Mariano and David discovered some inconsistencies in the FS9 DHC-6 (which is also nice, we can fix them now).
As promised to the guys, here's what I saw in X-Plane after landing ;)
Left to right (I think... I was last to land) are David, Mariano (both underground) then EJ. ;D
Post by: EHM-1997 Alexander on October 29, 2010, 10:14:12 pm
I saw you were on pp Murray so I flew the leg offline.
Better luck for me next time maybe ;D
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on October 29, 2010, 10:31:21 pm
Didn't take any post-landing pictures, though... :(
These I did take:
Lining up rwy25 KFMN for a formation take-off (tower view)
TCAS is a nifty tool to keep track of the other ones in the formation. But after a bit you'll want to turn the sound off :o
Not sure if this is to be a picture thread, though.
Anyway, for next leg, I will dive into the whole teamspeak / voice comms bit to see if we can arrange a voice connection for the group, and (more importantly) how.
I expect my next leg KNCY-KPVU to be on Monday, 2000(Z)-ish. (21:00 LT in the Netherlands)
Remember to put your clocks back an hour this weekend!
Post by: EHM-1997 Alexander on October 29, 2010, 10:59:03 pm
Post by: EHM-1465 Dominic on October 29, 2010, 11:28:57 pm
Mariano and David discovered some inconsistencies in the FS9 DHC-6 (which is also nice, we can fix them now).
What did you find gents? :)
Post by: EHM-2589 David on October 30, 2010, 10:43:43 am
Thanks for your comments ;)
Post by: EHM-2589 David on October 30, 2010, 01:03:47 pm
Quote
I expect my next leg KNCY-KPVU to be on Monday, 2000(Z)I'm not sur for monday, but I'll tried today and if I can monday I'll be at KNCY 20:15 GMT in normal flight ;) by IVAO of course, but I don't have voice, or could be tried text and receive voice, is new for me ???
Post by: EHM-1829 Trevor on October 30, 2010, 06:54:14 pm
I will have to fly Leg3 tomorrow as I am being dragged out for
dinner tonight. :)
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on October 31, 2010, 12:48:52 am
What did you find gents? :)
Hey Dom...
I'm gonna write quickly what I remember before I fall asleep on my keyboard
Basically, the plane is just too powerful and has an imperial ton of lift.
On full throttles and with the stick pulled full back, the plane will not stall. It pitches up about 30-40 degrees, gains some altitude and loses speed, then the nose drops to level, and then it will pitch up again once it reaches 80 or so knots, and keep climbing. I've never flown in one of these before but I'm pretty sure that's not possible.
What Murray is referring to is mostly it's straight line speed. I had no problem pushing my throttle to full and leaving Murray's plane (which i'm sure was far better simmed) behind by a large margin, him doing 115 knots indicated at about 90% throttle (correct me if wrong Murray) and me doing 160, 165 indicated... groundspeed 200+.
The worst part was trying to maintain formation with Murray and E-J, cos the slightest touch in my throttle meant going from 100 IAS to 130, I kept having to forward and retard it constantly to keep at 110.
The last but not least of my problems is the plane's behaviour when under flaps. With 20 or 30 flaps (I know it doesnt need that much at landing), an increase in throttle will make it pitch down rather violently. It has a lot of lift even in slow speeds which makes it rather tricky to land, I go in to the landing with negative pitch which in every way you look at it, it's wrong. I don't know at which IAS the plane will fly on but I'm pretty sure the difference between too much lift and a stall is quite small. And then when you notice the danger of stalling, you advance the throttle, and as I said before, it pitches down on it's own.
So yeah I hope that gives you some clues on where to look, sorry for the verbosity, when I'm looking for problems I like having as much info as I can.
Post by: EHM-1465 Dominic on October 31, 2010, 01:53:31 am
@ David - the loss of an engine must be down to failures being set. Do you fly with random failures set up? I know it's one of those features that PP was supposed to have but to be honest I'm not sure if its realised...
EDIT - There are some very useful documents on THIS PAGE (http://www.forum.aerosoft.com/index.php?showtopic=24723) which could help, particularly the performance specs which make it clear the PAD model is indeed overpowered at the altitudes we are flying at in the Event. Now all I have to do is work out which settings to change to alter the flight envelope the right way... ;D
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 31, 2010, 07:05:09 am
The last but not least of my problems is the plane's behaviour when under flaps. With 20 or 30 flaps (I know it doesnt need that much at landing), an increase in throttle will make it pitch down rather violently. It has a lot of lift even in slow speeds which makes it rather tricky to land, I go in to the landing with negative pitch which in every way you look at it, it's wrong. I don't know at which IAS the plane will fly on but I'm pretty sure the difference between too much lift and a stall is quite small. And then when you notice the danger of stalling, you advance the throttle, and as I said before, it pitches down on it's own.
Under full flaps (yes, I do land with full flaps), I'm generally mostly throttle idle from the moment I put on full flaps - maybe 900ft AGL, then I'm definitely idle from turning out on final to landing. She doesn't need a awful lot of power change under flaps for the attitude/altitude to change wildly. VREF is only 90kts or thereabouts (I'm in bed right now, don't have the data in front of me, working from memory), but she doesn't stall under full flaps for a long way under that - hence nice, soft landings.
The other thing to say (if we're using the X-Plane model as the "standard" by which we're comparing) is that when I change flap settings, if I don't throttle back before hand and scrub at least 30kts, I gain 500+ft in altitude in no time... so she's a hand-full in the approach phase to say the least; you can see why I prefer to fly at least one circuit ;)
@ David - the loss of an engine must be down to failures being set. Do you fly with random failures set up? I know it's one of those features that PP was supposed to have but to be honest I'm not sure if its realised...
@David - I'm yet to have a leg without some "mechanical" problem or other. Blown tire on the first leg (reset, wasn't expecting any failures), engine fire in the second leg (which I recovered from correctly), and in the most recent leg, an engine "stall" just before take-off (which you either saw or didn't, I restarted it immediately). Fingers crossed for leg 4 ;)
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on October 31, 2010, 07:48:09 am
we have 3 planes: PAD, Aerosoft, and the X-plane one (don't know what brand that is)
we have 3 sims: FS9, FSX, and X-plane
we have 3 weather engines (or more if addons are used); one per sim
each model will have (slightly) different flight characteristics, and each sim will interpret that performance and weather data (slightly) differently.
So we must be careful not to start comparing aplles with pears, 'cause I can predict where that goes...
One thing I noticed is the white arc on Murray's (X-plane) Twotter extends to at least 120 KIAS, where mine (Aerosoft/FSX) goes up to 95 KIAS. The white arc indicated the flaps operations range: no flaps above the white arc! This is a clear indication of a significantly different flight dynamics model of those two planes...
(PS: weather is significant because IAS depends on density (determined from altitude and pressure), TAS on IAS and altitude, and GS on TAS and wind direction and magnitude, and in the end it is GS we are comparing, when in close formation)
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on October 31, 2010, 08:09:18 am
This is about the freeware, FS9 plane, available for download on the fleet page. I don't know which ever that is.
I do know that this is not realistic flying at all (all realism sliders are set to full)
Twotter (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5JHPES1CyA#)
At about 1:40, I pull back on the stick and just hold it there, full throttle, no flaps.
Then I set the autopilot at 8,000 ft and just leave it full throttle just to see how fast it'll go. Please note not only the final speed but the acceleration.
Something else to note, the % of propeller (in this panel it's the second set of dials from the top) is just stuck at 100+%.
And then I just do some acrobatics, because it can :P
I hope it helps find the problems
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 31, 2010, 08:31:58 am
Oh, and @Mariano, in landing config, stall speed is 58kts... I can walk faster than that ;D
E-J is flying the Aerosoft -300, the fleet model for Flight Sim is the PAD -300, and those of us in X-Plane are using Skycycle's -200 model. So, yes, y'all would be faster than those of us in X-Plane.
Post by: EHM-1997 Alexander on October 31, 2010, 08:55:09 am
One thing I noticed is the white arc on Murray's (X-plane) Twotter extends to at least 120 KIAS, where mine (Aerosoft/FSX) goes up to 95 KIAS. The white arc indicated the flaps operations range: no flaps above the white arc! This is a clear indication of a significantly different flight dynamics model of those two planes...
The aerosoft aircraft is payware, the other two are freeware planes. I think the issue described is that the x-plane freeware and the aerosoft a/c perform similarly (accounting for sim/weather differences), and the PAD freeware performs outside expected performance differences.
The x-plane model is also a -200, with PT6A20 engines putting out 550hp, whereas the PAD model is a -300 with PT6A-27 engines putting out 620hp (flat rated).
Changing the engines modelled in x-plane is a simple fix in planemaker if we want to uprate that to a -300, open the aircraft in planemaker, standard->engine specs-> change maximum available power from 550 to 620.
Post by: EHM-2589 David on October 31, 2010, 09:08:38 am
Quote
Do you fly with random failures set up? I know it's one of those features that PP was supposed to have but to be honest I'm not sure if its realised...Thanks Dominic, in fact I utilized default set up, I don't know how to eliminate the random failures ??? and I'm not sure if it's activated...
Quote
EDIT - There are some very useful documents on THIS PAGE which could helpA little question about the docs, the web said for FSX, but I've FS9 is the same to use them ??? I mean the check list, etc.
Thanks a lot ;)
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 31, 2010, 10:30:33 am
Changing the engines modelled in x-plane is a simple fix in planemaker if we want to uprate that to a -300, open the aircraft in planemaker, standard->engine specs-> change maximum available power from 550 to 620.
OK, so here's some performance figures for the X-Plane "-300" as per Alex's instructions.
Climb - 90% N1, 7.5deg pitch up (800fpm) = 90kts IAS (to 10,00, thence reduce to 600fpm to maintain 90kts - that's close to VX)
Cruise - 14,500ft @ 1025mb - @90% N1 = 120IAS || @100% N1 = 145kts (bang on CAS for the -300 at that alt)
Descent - -700fpm @ 70% N1 = 100IAS (almost perfect -1,000ft per 3 miles)
@E-J - if you could perform something similar (I just climbed out of KCNY to 14,500, got the 90% and 100% speeds, then turned 180deg and flew back - 30nm out and back) and tell us how the Aerosoft performs, we'll have 2 sets of data to aim at for the PAD (and my assertions are based on the PAD reference kneeboard).
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 31, 2010, 10:32:28 am
Thanks Dominic, in fact I utilized default set up, I don't know how to eliminate the random failures ??? and I'm not sure if it's activated... A little question about the docs, the web said for FSX, but I've FS9 is the same to use them ??? I mean the check list, etc.
Thanks a lot ;)
The PAD model kneeboard has both a checklist and reference (I printed them to use with the X-Plane model...) As for failures, I'm pretty sure they are in Realism (@Dom?).
Post by: EHM-2589 David on October 31, 2010, 11:18:57 am
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on October 31, 2010, 11:40:15 am
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on October 31, 2010, 08:24:54 pm
E-J, any chance of a nice, clear shot of the engine instruments (like the one above, but just the centre console)? Again, for comparison...
...
Here's the real deal:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Grand-Canyon-Airlines/De-Havilland-Canada/0783393/L/&tbl=&photo_nr=2&sok=&sort=&prev_id=0783394&next_id=0783392 (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Grand-Canyon-Airlines/De-Havilland-Canada/0783393/L/&tbl=&photo_nr=2&sok=&sort=&prev_id=0783394&next_id=0783392)
and this is what I can do right now (without changing computers and firing up the sim):
(http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/5458/2010oct21008.jpg)
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 01, 2010, 11:30:23 pm
I mean did you watch as I leveled the plane at 9000 or so and pushed it to over 160 knots in a few seconds?
It feels like it has 2 RR-Merlin engines under the wings to be honest.
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 02, 2010, 07:35:06 am
Here's the real deal:
[url]http://www.airliners.net/photo/Grand-Canyon-Airlines/De-Havilland-Canada/0783393/L/&tbl=&photo_nr=2&sok=&sort=&prev_id=0783394&next_id=0783392[/url] ([url]http://www.airliners.net/photo/Grand-Canyon-Airlines/De-Havilland-Canada/0783393/L/&tbl=&photo_nr=2&sok=&sort=&prev_id=0783394&next_id=0783392[/url])
Can't see the instruments properly in any of the airliners.net photos I found, whereas...
Quote
and this is what I can do right now (without changing computers and firing up the sim):
Perfect, I can read the text on the instruments (hence why I asked...) ;D
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 02, 2010, 07:39:08 am
Guys have you seen the video I posted?
Well, personally, no, but I was there when you were zipping past me like you were in a jet... The extra 100 (and a bit) horsepower brings me closer to the published data for the -300 (which the PAD claims to be and the Aerosoft is); however, there is still work to do on the PAD to bring it back toward the published performance.
Quote
It feels like it has 2 RR-Merlin engines under the wings to be honest.
The De Havilland Mosquito, eh... ;) Great plane, but you wouldn't want to use it for bush flying.
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 02, 2010, 10:18:13 am
Guys have you seen the video I posted?
OK, watched it now, and very instructive it is too Mariano; thank you.
The performance is clearly far in excess of what the model claims.
I especially enjoyed the engine fire at the end. ;D
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on November 02, 2010, 10:20:21 am
Guys have you seen the video I posted? How the aircraft pitches up and climbs at 3,000+ FPM, then levels for a tiny bit and then will go back to pitch 45 degrees up no problem? I thought you'd find it weird, certainly more weird than just attributing it to an 100 horsepower difference.
I mean did you watch as I leveled the plane at 9000 or so and pushed it to over 160 knots in a few seconds?
It feels like it has 2 RR-Merlin engines under the wings to be honest.
It does look like how the Aerosoft Twin Otter responds near stall conditions. With tremendous lift and overpowered engines, this is what you get. That calls for a high pitch, low speed stall situation. And as soon as the nose starts to drop, speed increases slightly, which is enough to eliminate the stall condition because of the oversized lift, starting the process all over again.
And yes, I had her at 200 KIAS at one time when I autopiloted her in a 1200 ft/min descend, but left the throttle at full, Prop rpm at full, and mixture at full. You'll get an overspeed warning over 160 KIAS, and in real life your wings would probably come off, but It is possible with those overpowered engines.
All this is design intent for this plane. It is meant to take off from short dirt strips, fully loaded with cargo and/or pax. So yes, it's an extreme design with extreme behaviour around the envelope edges. And that's exactly what makes this such a gem to fly ;D
Having said that, I must make the remark that I have not flown the PAD model myself. All I have to go on is my experience with the Aerosoft Twin Otter X model, and the looks and sound of your video. But it does not seem all that far off the mark to me...
Cheers,
Eric-Jan
...
Perfect, I can read the text on the instruments (hence why I asked...) ;D
Got an even better one in my latest progress report,
http://www.fly-euroharmony.com/forum/index.php/topic,6137.msg46874.html (http://www.fly-euroharmony.com/forum/index.php/topic,6137.msg46874.html)
Ciao,
E-J
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 02, 2010, 10:38:24 am
Got an even better one in my latest progress report,
...
Ciao,
E-J
That's the one I've printed to compare with skycycle's panel layout ;D
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 04, 2010, 01:07:04 pm
Flying next leg (I believe its leg 4) tomorrow at around 18.00z
If there are other people in another similar schedule, I'll change my time so we can fly together.
Let me know ASAP in a post here or a PM
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 05, 2010, 06:23:06 pm
We can meet and fly leg 5 on sunday afternoon if anyone wants to join?
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 05, 2010, 06:59:35 pm
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 05, 2010, 07:50:41 pm
But if we all ganged up for sunday it could be a lot of fun.
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 05, 2010, 08:22:57 pm
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on November 07, 2010, 10:15:44 pm
Leg 05, Provo to Pocatello, ETD 1900(Z)~2000(Z) (depending on other "volunteers" replying below ;) )
but via a more or less alternative route:
KPVU Provo Mun
36U Heber City Mun-Mcdonald 025° 20,7nm
1U7 Bear Lake Co 348° 106nm
U78 Tigert 321° 26nm
KPIH Pocatello Regl 275° 47,6nm
A little valley-busting at 9500' max. :o
It's a little bit of a detour, but so much more fun to fly.
It will keep us out of any restricted areas, and avoid the Salt Lake City airspaces, to make things easier ;)
Anybody up for the challenge?
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 07, 2010, 11:26:12 pm
Anyone else up for it? Monday 1900 - 2000 z (I'm available all day to be honest)
Post by: EHM-1829 Trevor on November 08, 2010, 12:32:26 am
Hi Folks
Count me in; will be there. ;)
Cheers
Trevor
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 09, 2010, 12:14:33 am
I'll be flying this leg... "today" afternoon...
Again if I left you waiting, I'm terribly sorry. I should have set some sort of alarm.
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on November 09, 2010, 12:16:47 pm
We (Bruce T, Trevor, and myself) tried to VFR through the Rockies as planned. Here's an impression of our adventure.
First, a little show-off: our new Jack Wolfskin attire for the division crew :)
Trevor uses FS9, where I use FSX, so there is a slight mismatch in parking spots.
Bruce came online, first with FS9, later with FSX. He's the Beech B1900D, so you can tell them apart ;)
Off we go! into a low-overcast valley. Things start out tense already!
It looks like it will be valley crawling to stay below cloud.
With Trevor on my 5 o'clock, just past waypoint 1:
Searching for a way to get OVER the hills, while staying BELOW the clouds...
Looks like following this highway is going to make life easy for a VFR pilot
But hey, where did that highway go, all of a sudden?
Soon, the snow subsided, and we only had fog.
Then, we had a touch of nice weather again.
BTW, that's Trevor, at my 5 o'clock low.
Soon to be followed by snow again :)
I went in first, but couldn't figure out in time how to capture the ILS on this bird.
So a very low visual approach it was... :o
Soon to be followed by Trevor
And Bruce :)
One for the company yearbook :)
Top to bottom:
EHM-2131 Bruce Thomas
EHM-1829 Trevor Bolton
EHM-2387 Eric-Jan Oud
As you can see from the last three pictures, I captured the landing of my companions. I made a short movie from that:
EHW leg05.mp4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgN1XiekG4Y#ws)
(best viewed full screen in HD; double-click to play from YouTube directly)
Thanks Bruce and Trevor for the company; hope to see you next time too.
Follow this thread to find out when exactly.
Cheers,
Eric-Jan
Post by: EHM-1829 Trevor on November 09, 2010, 03:02:59 pm
No problem Mariano, see you on the next leg.
Nice write-up and pics E-J and to top that, a great paint job.
Their was no chance of weather smoothing on that leg, from t/o to landing all i saw was the instruments. ;D
Post by: EHM-2131 Bruce on November 09, 2010, 08:46:04 pm
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on November 09, 2010, 09:32:28 pm
Don't go expecting this kind of report every leg, now. I was tied to the house these last days with an intestinal bacteria thinghy. Higly contagious; even the dog had to suffer it.. But as of tomorrow, I'll be back to work again.
Not sure if leg 6 will be during the weekend, for me, or on Monday evening, again.
For now, let's say Monday 15th, anywhere between 1900Z and 2000Z, like yesterday.
KPIH-KSMN via PIH and LKT VORs. East of Mt. Corruption, then West of Red Point, then along the 93 through the pass to Lehmi. And all that can be done at 5500 ft, if clouds permit ... ;)
See y'all up there!
E-J
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 10, 2010, 04:53:13 pm
UPDATE: Weather did improve as I descended into Salmon (visibility was good enough for a long visual approach)
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on November 11, 2010, 09:47:03 pm
I'll fly on Monday, the 15th, and will be at the apron after 1900Z, in order to take off no later than 2000Z. If Anybody wishes to join me on IVAO, then please do :)
If I feel up to it, I might even take on leg 7 right after that...
We'll see.
Ciao,
E-J
Post by: EHM-1829 Trevor on November 12, 2010, 06:28:05 pm
Hi E-J
Flying leg 6 on Monday evening will be fine for me mate. It would be great to see a few more pilots; that’s if
they can wait that long. ;D
cheers
T
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on November 13, 2010, 11:44:10 pm
I hope that you reed this in time... :)
Post by: EHM-1829 Trevor on November 14, 2010, 08:43:22 pm
No probs Erik-Jan, ;) That’s one great thing about this hobby, having no real time restraints so we fly when we can.
We would not want it any other way.
Enjoy the calibrations mate.
Cheers
T
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 16, 2010, 08:20:23 pm
DO NOT, under any circumstances, attempt to fly leg 7 on IVAO with IVAO weather tonight. KTHM has thick fog down to the ground, and without a nearby weather station you're not going to find out until you get there. Did not enjoy my landing tonight...
Post by: EHM-1997 Alexander on November 16, 2010, 08:34:19 pm
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 16, 2010, 09:03:18 pm
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 19, 2010, 04:50:09 am
While pre checking and making sure everything was fine, which took me a long time cos not long before the flight, ivap had decided it's "weather" was not installed properly. So I had to reinstall ivap, a process which should have been easier, but I found 2 installations of it in my computer for some reason. Uninstalled both, downloaded the latest version again for good measure, installed it and run the weather fix thing it told me to run.
After all check's been done Franz showed up to join us, and when we were about to start up our engines when Yannick showed up. I hadn't met him till now but soon he joined us in chat and as I started my engines up (a lengthy process that might take 2 or 3 reloads of the aircraft, for some reason) the others did their checks and started theirs as well. I started taxiing first cos I wanted to see if the engines were really running. Management gave me the oldest twin otter on the fleet to fly so I have to be sure ;D
At last we were all ready to go and holding on the runway header waiting for Yannick to finish taxiing.
It's me on the foreground of course and from left to right Trevor, Franz and Yannick.
After my takeoff I turned north and started climbing normally, but soon knew things weren't normal cos for the first time in this whole tour I get a BOOP BOOP WINDSHEER that almost gave me a heart attack. Surely enough, IVAO's weather was getting crazy, shoving me left and right like a leaf. 30 knot winds changed 180 degrees with no previous warning. Franz suggested it could be FSUIPC not being registered (and so, not having wind smoothing), but honestly it had never happened before.
I got 5 more Windsheer warnings before I chickened out and descended to below 9500 to avoid chop. At this point I was so worried with flying the thing that navigating it, and following my mates, was very secondary. When things had settled down, I found out I was 10 miles west of where I was supposed to be (where everyone else was). So I leveled out, sort of plotted my course towards the airfield and enjoyed the scenary as my heart slowed down.
My ordeal wasn't over though, when my internet connection decided to give up. I knew at this point my flight wouldn't be submittable as per pro-pilot regulation so I cursed out loud, reconnected, and for some reason I couldn't see anyone else any more on the airplane views. I could chat with them, see them on my TCAS, but just couldn't see them at all. So I decided I'd hold right outside the valley that runs towards the airfield as they landed so they could give me a clear strip for me to land blindly on to.
I thought, by the maps I had seen, that it'd be a matter of following the valley and that alone would line me up with the runway, but right before it there's a huge mountain which I should have checked earlier. So I was surprised to have to climb so close to the final. A challenging approach, always enjoyable and the most fun part bush flying for me.
I came in hot as a meteor in terms of height but trying to keep my airspeed controlled. It was one of my best landings so far with this bird... didn't skip once. :D
I taxied out of the runway and parked hoping I hadn't parked on top of everyone, as they were still invisible for me.
All in all it was a fun flight although I would have liked to do some more formation flying. d**n you, winds.
Also Yannick reported having crashed due to his landing gear not being down? Do you guys confirm his PP reports him crashing? I thought that was really odd... Hope things get sorted out Yannick, if you sunk into the runway cos of some FS shannanigans, I'm sure management can restore your airplane for you.
One last thing, my pilot profile (the one I access from the main website) says my pilot status is 'removed' (understandably I hadn't flown since July before this wild tour) but it also has my flights logged. I'm sure it's something about these flights not being ordinary ones and as soon as I fly a non-PP scheduled flight it'd go back to active, but just something to look at if someone gets bored some day ;)
I'm leaving for a small tiny mini family vacation in Sevilla, Spain, in about... well 5 hours, so can't join in any weekend flying you guys might happen to have, but it'd be really nice if we could all get together for the last leg, as many people as possible. Let's come up with a day and hour and start spreading the word!
Post by: EHM-2589 David on November 19, 2010, 10:17:21 am
Quote
it'd be really nice if we could all get together for the last leg, as many people as possible. Let's come up with a day and hour and start spreading the word!Thanks for sharing your fly experiences Mariano :D and I'll be there (KTHM) saturday 20 or sunday 21 around 21:15 GTM for our last leg :)
PS: If the majority propose another day, of course I'll try to be, but I'm not sure to be with you before 21:00UTC. Family commitments ;D
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on November 19, 2010, 08:43:44 pm
I'm back on the grid again!
Had a party to go to, indeed, last Monday. So I flew my KPIH-KSMN very early Sunday morning already. Back-to-back stuff with work, and a course I had to stay over in a hotel for up to this afternoon. So that's why I've been so "quiet" last couple of days.
I will take on the KSMN-KTHM challenge next Monday from 1900Z (PC start-up time) ;) That will be the last day we are allowed to do that leg, so I better get there in one try ;)
After that, there's the final leg. I don't think I will be flying two legs in one evening, so any group date would have to be Tuesday or later. I will not be available on Friday evening (another birthday party ;) ;D) so my suggestion for the FINAL LEG, KTHM-CYCG, will be
Wednesday, 24 November, 1900Z PC start-up time
Hope to see the all of youz there, then!
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 21, 2010, 09:36:52 pm
I'm back home from my little family vacation in Seville, Spain. Drove almost 1,000 kilometers in 3 days so I'm pretty tired. I'll fly leg 7 tomorrow, and leg 8 on wednesday then? Or did you fly it already E-J?
Anyone in for it too? Let me/us know so we wait for you at the tarmac.
Post by: EHM-2387 Eric-Jan on November 22, 2010, 09:27:07 am
I'm still up for leg 7 this evening, and leg 8 on Wednesday, as I advertised above. So if you (or anybody else ... ) are there to join me, all the better!
I was thinking of sticking to the route as published on the event page, at 6500 or there about (in between the mountains, to make it more exciting (depending on weather, of cause).
I hope to "see" you this evening!
E-J
Post by: EHM-2155 Mariano on November 24, 2010, 07:31:39 pm
Where's everybody?
Post by: EHM-0654 Murray on November 27, 2010, 04:17:37 pm
Regarding your little problem, all fixed ;D