What's your current favourite flight ?

[stinger2k2]

Hi guys, (and gals )

 

As I reside in the UK i often choose to fly in Europe. My current favourite is Palermo, LICJ, Sicily, to Corfu LGKR. This is because I have recently purchased Corfu scenery by Fly Tampa.

 

What's yours and why ?

 

Cheers

Stinger

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[CRJ_simpilot]

Mine would be geo location relative to me as well. I currently live in the U.S. in the state of Colorado. And so being I'm more apt to fly in and out of KDEN (DIA) Denver International Airport and fly to Las Vegas, Nevada which is just two states away. I really like KDEN airport in the Sim and in real life. I've been there many, many times and it's a pretty nice airport and in the way it's designed. The person who designed the airport made it look reminiscent of the Rocky Mountains. The roof in the main terminal is a canvas-like tent for lack of a better word and it's actually open to the outside. But it's never hot or cold in the main terminal. The open parts serve to circulate air without having air circulation systems. Now in concourses A through C it's not like that. Concourse C would have to be my fav since there's a pedestrian bridge that goes over the taxiway. You can sit there in the bridge and watch the planes go under you. I did that once on a three hour layover. LOL

 

Anyway, I bought the upgraded KDEN from Flightbeam and to my amazement it includes the new hotel along side the main terminal.

 

Apart from me flying to and from Denver and Vegas, I'll hit up San Diego, Los Angeles, or John Wayne airport in Orange county which is near Newport Beach. So since I used to live in California those too have been places I like to fly to, and I've been to John Wayne airport and Newport Beach a couple of times. Even to go deep sea fishing some 50 miles off the coast of California which was a blast. Never been shark fishing, but I'd love to one day.

 

If I'm not flying domestically, I'm flying all over the world to some of the most remote and unheard of places. I've been to Christmas Island, Easter Island, Antarctica, North Pole, across Mongolia into China, the Arctic islands of Svalbard just North of Norway, and everywhere in between. I have hardly visited Africa though. Been to Egypt a few times mostly because my uncle is from Alexandria. Though I'm not Egyptian. He's an uncle by marriage.

 

Here's what the Denver airport looks like.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[NMLW]

I like all of "Doherty's Difficult & Dangerous Approaches" here in the library. There are 71 different ones and are listed for FS2004, but may be configured for FSX.

[jgf]

I enjoy VFR tours of series of small airports/airfields. Such as touch-and-goes at the county seats of each of Ohio's 88 counties. Or somewhat longer flights visiting the capital of each of the 48 contiguous states or the capitals of each African nation.

 

Also enjoy recreating historic flights like the first transcontinental passenger flight - New York to LA in a Curtiss Condor (can't do it accurately since at two points the passengers had to take a train to the next airport) or X-15 flights (rarely survive those, lol). When I get another game computer (last one ate its mobo and medical bills preclude an immediate replacement) my next project is the 1920 New York to Nome round trip by 4 DH-4 bombers of the Black Wolf Squadron; will have to create the "airfields" for this as many stops were in pastures or tiny airfields that no longer exist.

[CRJ_simpilot]

Wow! I just read that the X-15 moved at more than 4,500 MPH! Good grief! Yeah, I think it's safe to say anyone would have a hard time controlling that sucker. And here I thought manually flying my F-22 at mach 2.35 was hard. Talk about sensitive. When you're moving at about 1,500 MPH and you slightly move the yoke up, down, left, or right the attitude and bank changes are enormous. I try to go back to FL500 and I've shot past that by at least 500 feet with just the slightest amount of pressure on the yoke. I always have to use auto pilot just to maintain a constant and stable flight.

 

I'm almost certain now that I think of it that the real life F-22 has a computer aid in your attitude corrections. It would have to. I do remember reading that the F-22 is so maneuverable that the computer has to limit the pilots input so as to not kill him in high G maneuvers. Now wait till they make the F-22 unmanned. Look out foe!

[PhantomTweak]

I'm almost certain now that I think of it that the real life F-22 has a computer aid in your attitude corrections. It would have to. I do remember reading that the F-22 is so maneuverable that the computer has to limit the pilots input so as to not kill him in high G maneuvers. Now wait till they make the F-22 unmanned. Look out foe!

Most modern fighters, including the "F"-117 (it's actually designed as a bomber), are what they call "Inherently Unstable". IE, a human can't fly them without assistance. They have an odd number of computer systems, and the pilot tells the computers what he wants the plane to do. The computers get together, chat about it for a leisurely few microseconds, and then the computers move the control surfaces to make the plane do as close to what the pilot asked as possible, without departing controlled flight, or damaging the plane or pilot.

 

You may just have a sensitive controller, or you're using FSUIPC to adjust the sensitivity curves. Or that particular aircraft is just tuned really sensitive. You could turn the controller's sensitivity down a tad with the Control Panel, if you want. Or you can get into the aircraft.cfg and play with the [Flight_Tuning] to lower the plane's responsiveness.

 

Anywho, my favorite flights are out to a carrier, do some CQ type maneuvers, then back tot he shore station. Or FCLP bounces. Or taking a RTWR plane up and then landing it from it's best cruise altitude. Practice makes perfect.

 

Those are mine. I mostly stick to the West Coast, as I was born and raised there, and live (close to) there now. I don't fly tubes. I want a plane I FLY, not sit in and push buttons on the AP and FMC. And then watch it cruise for the next few hours on AP. I want to FLY the plane, not program it.

But that's just me. Some folks enjoy that sort of thing.

 

Have fun, whatever your favorite flights are :)

Pat☺

[Rohan_Nair]

Current favorite flight? Well my favorite flight was, is and will be.. a flight to "northwest of the globular cluster M55, in the constellation Sagittarius, roughly 2.5 degrees south of the fifth-magnitude star group Chi Sagittarii, and about 3.5 degrees south of the plane of the ecliptic."

 

That's where the "Wow!" signal is believed to have originated from. I want to go there and find out what's up. The "Wow!" signal is a radio signal received in 1977 from there and is believed to be of extra terrestrial origin.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wow!_signal

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wow!_signal#Celestial_location

I wonder if we are the first form of life in the universe.. or the last?

 

Nuff' musing for 2018. Happy New Year!

 

Some food for thought:

 

"Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying" -Arthur C. Clarke

[jgf]

Wow! I just read that the X-15 moved at more than 4,500 MPH! Good grief! Yeah, I think it's safe to say anyone would have a hard time controlling that sucker. ...

 

Very little of the flight(s) were at such speeds; those records were done just to set the records basically. A typical flight consisted of being dropped from the B-52 at around 35k ft and 250kts, all systems on except engines. About five seconds after the drop the engines were ignited, throttled to a specified speed for that flight, and a smooth climb to test altitude, typically 80k - 150k ft (its highest flight was over 350k ft). By that point the fuel for the main engines is usually spent and the plane is a high speed glider. Above around 70k ft normal flight controls are ineffective so reaction controls are used, many of the flights were just to test these; other flights explored ablative heating, high altitude gliding, communications, pilot health, etc., all for use in the space program.

 

At those speeds and altitudes the X-15 handles quite well, since that was its design; it is below 300kts and 10k ft that it is a beast, sluggish and unresponsive, it will stall in a heartbeat. The experimental part of the flight is usually a shallow parabola through the upper atmosphere, then a lengthy glide back to Edwards AFB ...where you have only one chance to land (and where most of my flights end as a grease spot in the desert), design touchdown speed was 200kts.

[lnuss]

I agree with Pat: "I want a plane I FLY, not sit in and push buttons on the AP and FMC."

 

So my favorites typically are in light aircraft (Cub, Bonanza, Stearman, etc., once in a while in an L-39 or an MS-760 just for a change of pace, even a DC-3) in multiplayer with my friend, sometimes in formation, sometimes just one following the other, sometimes doing an "airshow" for each other, often times very low (20-200 feet), other times at a couple of thousand on AP admiring the scenery and chatting or, "Hey, look at this!" Most of it is in "ORBX land" of North America, and we still, after several years, are finding new airports in that region to visit and admire. But we've also fleshed out a lot of airports in New Mexico (purpose built buildings, aircraft, etc.), where we once flew together for a few years (he had the flight school), so we'll sometimes go there for old times sake, and to reminisce.

[CRJ_simpilot]

Very little of the flight(s) were at such speeds; those records were done just to set the records basically. A typical flight consisted of being dropped from the B-52 at around 35k ft and 250kts, all systems on except engines. About five seconds after the drop the engines were ignited, throttled to a specified speed for that flight, and a smooth climb to test altitude, typically 80k - 150k ft (its highest flight was over 350k ft). By that point the fuel for the main engines is usually spent and the plane is a high speed glider. Above around 70k ft normal flight controls are ineffective so reaction controls are used, many of the flights were just to test these; other flights explored ablative heating, high altitude gliding, communications, pilot health, etc., all for use in the space program.

 

At those speeds and altitudes the X-15 handles quite well, since that was its design; it is below 300kts and 10k ft that it is a beast, sluggish and unresponsive, it will stall in a heartbeat. The experimental part of the flight is usually a shallow parabola through the upper atmosphere, then a lengthy glide back to Edwards AFB ...where you have only one chance to land (and where most of my flights end as a grease spot in the desert), design touchdown speed was 200kts.

 

That's very interesting. I've been to KEDW a few times to see the space shuttle land since I lived in Riverside at the time. Still have some VHS tapes around here with that I need to dub to DVD or blu-ray.

 

I've heard of the X designation flights, but never really read too much about them.