jgf

Wasn't issued til 1927 https://www.businessinsider.com/the-first-pilot-license-issued-in-the-us-2013-7?op=1 Sold at auction recently for an undisclosed amount.

"If it doesn't work, get a hammer. If it still doesn't work, get a bigger hammer. If it breaks, it needed replacing anyway."

Sounds like the AP is in approach mode.

AH aircraft have varied in the past, but generally were good. I don't know if their FSX/P3D versions are new or modified from the FS2004 planes, but at the price they're worth it. Another option is the Manfred Jahn C47/DC3, also free. Get both and see which you like best, lol. https://a2asimulations.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62212

A friend many years ago told me of flying with friends back in the thirties and forties, they would use a standard broadcast band radio, tune to a known station, rotate the radio for best reception and note the bearing, fly another 10-20 minutes and repeat, then triangulate their position on a map. For shorter distances they would use standard road maps and just follow the roads and rivers (I have often wished FS terrain were accurate enough for this). Of course little GA flying was done above 4k-5k feet back then. One of the first passenger aircraft accidents was in France where two aircraft, both navigating by following the same road, collided.

Oh how I miss Active Sky, but they shut down the servers for all but the latest version. So they'll never get another penny from me. Sadly I've found no replacement.

For these distances it isn't too difficult. I'm using GPS to get the bearing, distance, and time, then fly most of the route without it on screen. "Go this direction for this long" and constantly tweak aileron trim to counteract fuel use; but I do go to GPS or Terravue to find the airport, and runway orientation.

FSRepaint works with aircraft mdl files but no others, as far as I know. It is still available - https://www.fsrepaint.com/fsrepainting/ Now compatible with FSX and P3D, apparently will soon be compativle with MSFS.

FWIW, departing YFRT Approach YCDU 345 miles in 1:41.11 Reset timer and GPS for next leg Leaving YCDU Approaching YPAG Egad! That was close (I'll pay a buck and a half to watch a 737 land here) 238 miles in 1:14.33 (you can monitor my fuel consumption by the tank switch in lower left; starts in lower left, then lower right, middle left, middle right, upper right, upper left) Approaching YPPF 171 miles, 55 minutes What idiot put a tree at the end of the runway Off to Renmark And there's YREN 128 miles in 39:50; 13 gallons fuel remaining, so this is a good place to stop A breeze compared to circumnavigating half the Pacific to get here. Next stop Naracoorte.

I'm still sitting at Forrest, wave as you go by.

Boeing will survive. Airbus did - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_296Q McDonnell Douglas did - https://simpleflying.com/american-airlines-flight-191/ Even more recent, who remembers this - https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/passenger-video-shows-terrifying-moment-united-flight-328-engine-caught-n1258473 In modern manufacturing the bottom line is ... the bottom line. Innovation be damned, quality be damned, pride be damned, we must pay more dividends to our investors every year.

Wow, very interesting. I'll bet that was an enviable setup in its day. No doubt some collector will be glad to get it.

"No one has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people." H. L. Mencken

Probably the closest a "roadable airplane" got to production was the Waterman Aerobile, it "flew safely but generated little customer interest, and only five were produced". There is an FS version, which flies like a generic light plane. The Moller Skycar has been in and out of the news for ages but has yet to fly. "After forty years and $100,000,000 in expenditure the Skycar demonstrated tethered hovering capability in 2003. It has been extensively marketed for pre-order sale since the 1990s as Moller attempted to raise more money for development." The company is "now dormant". There is an FS version of this also, but I believe it uses a helicopter flight model.

How safe would you feel in a "cheap" aircraft? I'm reminded of Alan Shepard's comment on his first flight, "I'm sitting on top of a half million pounds of high explosive, with the knowledge that each component was built by the lowest bidder".

Design error? Boeing fault. Material error? Subcontractor/supplier fault. Maintenance error? Fleet operator fault. They will pass the buck for ages, inspect the remaining aircraft and get them back in the air as quickly as possible, and everyone will soon forget.

Probably depends on where the aircraft normally fly. I'm surprised all trainers aren't bright orange, that is the color most easily discerned by eye; but that seems reserved for special purpose aircraft. But for maintenance military is a different matter, all air forces can afford a platoon of mechanics to swarm over an aircraft after every landing. A luxury not available to most private, or even commercial, owners.

That was my problem in the last rally - the expectations of my 75 yr old Bonanza were a bit optimistic for the entire route.

Note the bird's beak at the right and the two upraised wings trailing back to form the lines. Definitely Art Deco inspired.

I bet you're seeing red from that.

There were about a half dozen factory paint schemes, all solid color aircraft with the side flash (actually a stylized bird), and sometimes leading edges, in a contrasting color. Among them were yellow with green trim, cream with vermilion trim, red with white or black trim, and green with white or dark red trim. For "an additional price" the customer could have any color(s) they wanted.

As we ponder my next move, a bit of trivia about my aircraft. The Beech company never used the term "Staggerwing", and in fact were quite opposed to it. So that naturally became the unofficial name of the plane. Officially it was always the Beech Model 17. When perusing photos of these planes you will find myriad colors and color combinations, but very few white aircraft (just the opposite of aircraft today). White aircraft paint of that time was not as durable as other colors, nor did it provide as much UV protection (little known then), so it took several more coats of white paint to provide the same protection to the airframe (which was primarily fabric covered wood). This not only added about 30-40 lbs to the aircraft but became rather brittle when fully dried so was prone to cracking, necessitating constant maintenance to repaint over the cracks. Beech actively tried to dissuade owners from ordering white paint jobs, and finally instituted a policy of no airframe warranty on white 17s. (FWIW, most aircraft today are white for easier maintenance. A walk around from twenty feet away will easily disclose any stains, dents, scratches, corrosion, etc., which would require much closer inspection with any other color.)

Have cursed this with props and clouds, and in each case have been told it is due to how the models' textures are layered and viewed ... and there is nothing the end user can do.

Ah, a specular layer is usually highlight and shading; if you paint an aircraft a solid color it doesn't look right because there's little 3D effect of just one color over the model, so you add highlights to areas that would have more light on them and shadows to areas that should be darker. This makes painting easier since you can just apply the color(s) and let the shading layer tone the color. The alpha is applied over all this; alpha is not a layer as such but is a map telling the program how reflective each area should be. This may help - https://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php/74535-Specular-maps-in-FSX

That may work, just make sure the DDS conversion is the very last thing you do. Try it and let us know, if it doesn't work all you've lost is some time (I hate to think of the time I've wasted ...er, spent ... trying to get a livery to appear as I wanted; occasionally even scrapping the work and starting over). The main thing is to always have a good clean bmp master file, so if the finished product isn't acceptable you can always go back to that file and try again.