|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 28, 2009 17:52:33 GMT -5
Dearie me Ed, Proppies blonde wig has obviously led you astray.
We'll have to find you an appropriate Prospect for next year from the old country. Something designed with the respectable Ocker in mind with a separate cabin for the support crew and a suitable box in the back for the eskie.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 25, 2009 9:52:47 GMT -5
I could tell you tales about flat-sharing with Banana Benders in London in the '70s, but:
1.) They might now have lawyers
2.) SWMBO may be about
3.) If she isn't Ed's wife will shop me
We also let a (teetotal) lass from Sydney and a Kiwi in, just to show how broadminded we were.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 24, 2009 19:28:02 GMT -5
It's a problem with the sim, if you watch carefully when you restart a flight you'll see that the sim starts at a momentary 0 knots and then switches to the saved speed. That glitch is enough to reset the timer as it only registers above 35 knots. Good luck with the minutes:seconds to decimals arithmetic!
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 23, 2009 6:01:18 GMT -5
Happy Birthday to Cap'n Hobbit.
21 today, and every best wish for many more,
Allan
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 23, 2009 5:56:23 GMT -5
Hi Ed, Well I would have entered it in the GAAR, but it has a dodgy bearing in the gearbox and a note on the panel about being sold by a youngster heading home to the land down under. (As used in the current international tv ads for QANTAS A380s) With the pound plummeting against the Euro and US$ we may be out to see the Big Pineapple sooner than expected.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 22, 2009 19:34:14 GMT -5
Now when I loaded up the DH.91, I used the fact that the engines had 12 cylinders each to alias in a Lancaster sound set. IIRC it can be a bit tippy on the nose if you slam on the anchors. A definite candidate for the most elegant entry for any era. Sir Geoffrey did make exceedingly fine aerial carriages for the gentlefolk - and Banana Benders ( must remember our hosts for the event). I've just downloaded the Albert Camus Leopard Moth repaint G'ACUS, so off to play tomorrow night with that before getting down to a couple more legs before the start of Feb. Like John my first leg had a fairly brief but rosy dawn before clearing for the majority of the flight. Just goes to show how variable FS can be in apparently similar settings on different machines.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 22, 2009 3:17:41 GMT -5
Make the most of that tailwind, you won't see many more heading down to Perth! You hit the nail on the head, it's just like golf - the secret is in the short game. Of course the three legs I've flown to date have all gone the same way: Calmly Into the circuit nicely on time. Where did the time go, get on the ground NOW, Panic, too fast, brakes - slow down. Rats, maybe next time.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 15, 2009 3:52:33 GMT -5
No-one said you had to look at your target times or scores until the end of March! If you did - and wish you hadn't, you could always qualify a different aircraft and then have the steely resolve to keep away from the time and score webpage until the end of the event. I suppose it depends on your point of view, if you're flying GA aircraft then target times are much more approximate than if you're flying the DC-3 on a scheduled or charter flight. Not a great fan of the secret squirrel approach to organisation of an event myself, I have seen that cause friction and distrust in the past in other places. Personally, like Andrew, I just give it one go at each leg. If that doesn't match the target (and two years ago I only got one 100 score for any leg with two entries) then too bad - onward and downwards to the next one.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 6, 2009 6:14:36 GMT -5
Bud,
As the GAAR is open to all the times will not be automatically registered on the Bluegrass time system, so you will need to submit the times twice. You can always add them all together in one submission at the end.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 5, 2009 18:07:11 GMT -5
Sounds like an excellent and practical idea to me.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Jan 2, 2009 14:08:57 GMT -5
Irrespective of the settings on individual machines, as Andrew says above the important thing to remember for the entire event is that if it is too difficult it isn't panning out as it was intended. If a flight ends in darkness then shift the time for the start by 30 minutes, or change the time in flight by an hour and subtract it from the total. It is all based on trust and the idea of having fun in aircraft of your choice, so chill and don't get hung up on difficulties that were not intended. If you do hit a problem, let everyone know by all means so that a solution can be suggested.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Dec 24, 2008 15:02:23 GMT -5
Merry Christmas to all and may the New Year bring everything you wish for.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Dec 17, 2008 15:45:29 GMT -5
R1, You could have a nosy round www.cbfsim.org - Rick's a frequenter and there may well be something in one of the forum posts on the subject. Business and Christmas commitments are going to get in the way of my test flight before the year end, so the ground crew will have plenty of time to polish up the Concordia in advance
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Dec 12, 2008 15:13:46 GMT -5
As the 182Q has the fixed gear and I assume the same 230HPengine, the main non-cosmetic differences are a three bladed prop against a two bladed prop.
Perhaps Andrew can give a definitive view.
As alternatives within X, I believe that Milton Shupe's Spartan Executive has been ported over and apparently most of Jens Kristensen's aircraft have too. Perhaps they are acceptable options if they have suitable nav equipment.
Back on safer ground with fs2004, 'cos I'm a luddite, any of Jens K's prop aircraft and all of Milton Shupe's aircraft excepting the Dash 7 are acceptable and several have been used in past years.
Of the default aircraft in fs2004 the DH-88, DC-3 and Lockheed Vega fit the age bill; so does the J3 but it may be short on range and may be too slow for the distances invloved unless you have time on your hands.
The 172 and 182 default aircraft are later models, the 172 had a smaller engine in the '50s and the 182 is a 3-blade prop. On a personal note I would have thought they were close enough to the spirit intended, but a definitive view should clarify.
|
|
|
Post by Allan_Lowson on Dec 11, 2008 20:16:19 GMT -5
As both the 172 and 182 first flew in the mid 50's, I would have thought you were OK with them. The T34 from Carenado would also qualify, if you have that and it has the instruments!
|
|