Sirrus

I never download anything from this site as Google always blocks it. I use Simviation, Avsim, Rikoooo, Fly Away, Perfect Flight, French VFR, FSX Freeware Scenery, and SOH, all without having the same trouble I have on this site. Therefore it is logical to say that there is something wrong with the way this site deals with downloads. It needs to be sorted, now!

In the CONUS, on a road trip, you eat where the truckers eat. If the parking lot isn't full of Peterbilts, Maks, and the odd Diamond T, move on, the truckers have. In towns, eat where the local cops eat, but don't take the last donut! There are of course "special" places to eat. The Brothers Taverna in Salem,MA., Cafe Beignet on Royal Street in NOLA, ( if you're really lucky you get the "Steamboat Willie" Jazz band as well) and Scoma's in San Francisco (the fishing boats dock feet away on Fisherman's Wharf so the fish is fresh) In Europe, you eat Pastel de Belem at Pasteis de Belem in Lisbon, (Buy more than one as they are delicious and there is always a queue), Moules Mariniere in any French or Belgian seaside town, but don't drink the wine they are cooked in - your legs won't work afterwards, Belgian Chocolate (almost anywhere) and you eat where the locals eat, not in any of the tourist traps.

I believe this aircraft has been withdrawn from multiple sites like Simviation, Flightsim and Avsim. I also understand that the developers can be contacted in the Forum areas of FS Nordic/FlightsimForum.fi.

Try freewarescenery.com. Go to the FSX section, click on U, scroll down to United Kingdom and look through what they have. Also PCPilots of Ireland used to have a great website, so you could try there. Good Luck.

If you're interested in in space missions, you could join Kayamone Sutton's Virtual United States Space Program. The original VUSSP had 150 members, conducted over 100 unmanned missions and over 20 manned missions. Highly recommended. http://www.vussp.org

Not in that colour scheme! XX201 was the only 208(R) Squadron aircraft at Farnborough that week, and Howard Curtis's photograph of it shows '201 to be in its standard training black.

Yes, certainly is. In the config file, there are usually three lines that can look like this;- [brakes] parking_brake=1 //Parking brake available toe_brakes_scale=0.74 //Brake scalar The number here may vary. This one comes from a CLS Piper Arrow. You may adjust the "toe_brakes_scale" line, up to a value of 1. When the aircraft noses over, you know you've gone too far. Many WW1 aircraft have this set at 0. It take time to find the right number for each aircraft without skidding on a wet runway, or burying the nose in your local grass strip. If you decide to go this route, be careful and good luck.

I can't use my FSX/P3D B-25 Mitchell in FS2020, so FS2020 doesn't appear to be my next acquisition, but the newest version of P3D might. And I put hours of work into repainting my Mitchell. So you're asking me to dump all that? Why should I when I can move on to a flight sim where I can use it. As for the cardboard Spitfire, wasn't there one of those in FS2002? However, if I were starting from scratch, and didn't want to buy second hand copies of FSX/FS2004, then, I just might look at FS2020.

You miss some good stuff. Don't tell anyone but I will swap cockpits around until I get one I like - sometimes it's a VC and sometimes 2D. (I have a Harvard with a Mustang cockpit!) It's all a matter of personal preference, of individuality, which is how it should be without some person telling you what is "correct/right/normal".

The thought occurs to me that maybe, just maybe, FS2020 was not aimed at those of us who have used the older sims. E.G. if you had FS2004, your next move "up" was FSX, and if you had FSX, your next move was P3D. At least, you could use some of the previous versions aircraft in the newer version. (Although I occasionally use an aircraft or two from FS2002 in FSX!) So FS2020, and FS2024 may not be aimed at the "enthusiast" market but X-Box users, Playstation users and other console users who expect, and get, high quality graphics from their games. And, one thing is certain, those of us who have invested in their "older" versions of Flight Sim, will never say that a younger version is better than theirs.

I do not know what Alp you have been hiding behind, but the World Trade Center twin towers, as shown in your post... ...were destroyed in an infamous terrorist attack on September 11th 2001. The fact that you choose to put these on a thread where there are people who lost friends and colleagues shows very poor taste, and you should remove them.

This ended up as and Capable of 387 knots at 33000 feet, and of flying from RAF Benson to Berlin and back.

When was this decided? Four days of drivel about rules and regulations and you end up where you started, The only interesting bits were "how to make scenery" (which will come in handy someday,) and why a helo pilot sits on the right. The rest was useless, like herding cats, we've ended back where we started, a loose collection of enthusiasts who want to fly, write stories and have fun. If we wanted rules and regulations we would have joined a Virtual Airline, and to try and squeeze us into a myriad of rules is not to understand us at all and to completely misread the room. If you want to be "in charge", be a "Commodoor" go away and found your own VA. You won't last long, they never do.

Why should I bother? Every suggestion I have made in this group has been ignored from altering the scoring system in the Route 66 Challenge (to one that we used in the Australia Challenge) to not having a base at all, and having a silly name has been ignored. I have been abused, made to look stupid in these threads and been shouted at by those in authority in this clique. I have not received a single apology for any of it, so much so that I think the word "sorry" doesn't exist in American. No, I'm not going to waste any more of my time on this cliquey club.

Who decided this? Surely this should be a decision made by the membership?

And yes, that's always one way data! On any flight if your range isn't enough to complete the flight as planned,you might (probably will) end up dead! HELLO!! No need to be rude or sarcastic!

Thanks, Kit.

Thanks Melo, that helps a lot.

I wonder if "range" means there and back, which would give a point A to B distance of 2720 miles? Thanks for that.

What sort of range do you get from your Spit?

More recent abandoned heliports were the heliport actually on the Las Vegas Strip near the Monte Carlo which was there in 2003, but had gone by 2007, and the "Fly High Heliport" on the Irlo Bronson Highway/I192 out of Kissimmee, heading West, that was a fixture for me from 2008 up to 2018. It now seems there is a supermarket on the site. However, Frederick Zealor did an excellent version of it that works well in FSX and is a regular landing spot for any new heli I acquire.

Where? If you are going to fly from the Scottish Capital you might, at least, spell it correctly. It is spelt EDINBURGH, like it says on the terminal building.

With the start of the European and UK display seasons 10 days away, and especially the 80th Anniversary of D-Day, along with 3 days of Fairford and a week at Farnborough, not forgetting the Tour de France (which finishes in Nice this year) and La Vuelta, my itinerary is getting fuller day by day. So participation in this "mini challenge" depends on where it is, how long it is, and how long it takes to organize. Otherwise, see you guys in the Autumn.

With only two Airbus's delivered so far and 120 Boeing 737s in service, it's hardly a transformation!

Very, very true. In both Boeing and Airbus the direction of travel comes from the top. Personally, I would like to see less accountants and more engineers in boardrooms. Companies make better "stuff" with engineers at the helm, Henry Royce and the Merlin, William Lyons and the E-type Jaguar, as well as Enzo Ferrari and Henry Ford at their respective companies. I've flown quite happily on all the above types, spending ten years crossing the Atlantic, usually in a 747. I want Boeing to be successful, I do not want Airbus to be my only option in airliners, so they have to clean up their mistakes (of which V-22 may be one) and get back to making great aeroplanes again. And... if an aircraft kills 30 people in testing, and then a similar machine kills its test pilots, then perhaps, just perhaps we should look again at tilt-rotor technology. Maybe the idea is ahead of the engineering that makes it work.