TomPenDragon

Re: A,B): +1! Re: C): Congratulations, Kit! How did it feel, shutting down for the last time after your first circumnavigation?

Very quickly: Orbiter still does exist, and can be found at http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/ . The latest version on that site is 2016. In 2021, Martin Schweiger, the developer, put the source code out on GITHub, as time constraints kept him from developing the program further (makes him ACES in my book). There are a ton of add-ons. Orbiter is a true, Newtonian physics space flight simulator. If you think helicopters are hard... But the views... I don't know Kerbal, but from the website https://www.kerbalspaceprogram.com/ , it seems more like a Sim City for space than a spaceflight simulator. For exploring the cosmos with feet on terra firma, there's Stellarium http://stellarium.org/ . Within 5 minutes, I discovered that I've been looking for Pons-Brooks in the wrong place. There now is a web-based version, so nothing to install. And a quick apology for being so quiet lately - the RW has been encroaching - in a good way; our blood work came out good, and my wife just celebrated a big birthday. More things to do, though, so gotta boogie... Will check in when I can. Peace. Out.

If you're talking about the HoverControl training scenery, I think it's a good recommendation. I'm really glad to see it survive here when so much of that great library seems to have been lost. One does not need the scenery to learn whirlybirds; neither does one need to use the platforms and everything until they're ready. If someone like PhrogPhlyer (how many rotary-wing hours do you have in your logbooks between RL and FS, Dick?) feels the need to practice basic maneuvers from time to time, it's probably a good idea to take his suggestion to not get ahead of ourselves. If I want to relax and have fun (at this point in my flying journey), I'll grab something fixed-wing. I'll only get in a helicopter now if I'm ready to work and learn. Guess what? It's like having a whole new sim, after two decades of FS2004. "It was 20 years ago today, ACES gave us a new sim to play..." (Apologies to John and Paul...)

I wanted to drop a quick note of thanks to everyone who's weighed in on helicopters so far, and especially to PhrogPhlyer and Rupert, who've actually flown them - in 'Nam, too (when you've got bullets coming through the floorboards, ya gotta have brass cojones, as well as mad flying skills to keep 'em from getting shot off). We all have different ways to process learning. For me, the way to learn helicopters is to start by forgetting everything I know about flying and start from zero. What thousands of pages and hundreds of hours over the years had failed to do (my problem, not the writers' and experts') and you guys finally succeeded, was to get me to realize that I was making my biggest mistake not in pulling the collective up too quickly or anything like that, but much earlier in my flight - at the vehicle selection screen. All these years, I've been trying to force helicopters into this massive mental model that I've built with every flight I've planned and taken, called, "Flying." Outside of getting you into the air and taking you someplace, to me they are completely different. Thus, approaching helicoptering as, "hopping in the plane and going somewhere," has to go out the window. My old practice of pulling up on the collective, pushing the cyclic forward, and hoping to get into some sort of controllable flight before I hit something is not only bad flying practice; it's counterproductive in the sense that it all gets chucked into the "Flying" mental model, and all I learn is that helicopters are bad aircraft because they don't fly like Cessnas and Cherokees. So, new mental model. Blank slate. "Helicoptering." They shouldn't even call them, "Helicopters;" they should call them, "Humblecopters," because each time I get in one, it's a humbling experience. The most important thing, then, is to find a humblecopter that I can work with. Here too, we each have a favorite (or a least-hated). Mine is the Nemeth Brothers' EC120B. Yesterday, I flew a B-58 from Meigs to Le Mans, with the window rolled down and my arm hanging out of it holding a root beer (after crossing the pond at Mach 2.05, I've got a bit of a wind burn). Then, I took my Colibri to a little flat spot in the Eifel Mountains where the Nürburgring Flugplatz should be, the way I usually flew it (mostly on autopilot. I was able to land it safely (I usually can), albeit not exactly on the spot that I wanted to hit (I never can). This morning, I just decided to practice. Day One. I don't have a throttle to control thrust or a yoke to control elevator and ailerons. I have two sticks that serve to shape the helical lift vortex that's being generated a few feet above my head. I pull the one that controls the amplitude of the vortex. The turbine is running at a constant speed, fuhgeddaboudit. The number that moves with the collective is the torque. At about 28% torque, the strength of the vortex equals the weight of the humblecopter. Dust starts appearing and I need to neutralize the torque to keep from yawing. 30% and the cabin windows start to sink. Neutralize torque, leave the cyclic alone. Right now, I want a perfectly round, perfectly vertical lift vortex. I keep the roof of the cabin at eye level. Holy Squitts, I'M HOVERING!!! There's a 15-knot wind, too, and I'm staying in place. Okay, so if the collective controls the vortex' amplitude, what does the cyclic do? Well, all I have is this vortex over my head; I don't have anything else to move me ahead. I push the cyclic forward slightly. All of a sudden, my lift vortex isn't perfectly round, perfectly vertical. It's got a lump in the back. I start to move. I'm not getting any thrust, I remind myself. I'm shaping lift, so that there's more of it toward the tail. So, the cyclic controls the vortex shape. The collective controls amplitude. The cyclic controls wave (vortex) shape. Helicopters aren't anything like aircraft. They're like old, analog synthesizers. The collective is the keyboard, each position along its travel producing a note via a voltage. The cyclic is the VCO/VCF. The voltage from the keyboard is converted into a tone by the oscillator (VCO - Voltage-Controlled Oscillator, VCF - Voltage-Controlled Filter) and further shaped by the filter. I do a few liftoffs and touchdowns, try to move around a bit, then a quick hop to Frankfurt for fuel. For the first time at EDFZ, I set down next to the pump for the first time (note to self: if you want to land on a spot, aim in front of it). Back at the 'Ring, take it down an octave. Put a lump in the front of the vortex to slow down and maintain altitude, then sink... Shape, shape, shape, shape, circular... drop it down a major fifth, and I'm back next to my cabin, only a couple of feet away from the oily spot of dirt that I chose as a touchdown spot. It wasn't perfect. The quickest way to get rich in my simworld still is to own the barfbag concession on my helicopters. But for once, a safe landing wasn't an accident. That's something I can build on. Thanks so much, guys! (As soon as I took the headphones off, I started hearing reports of an earthquake in New Jersey. Are you okay, Dick?)

MAD1 has summarized the meeting conclusions better than I ever could: Sorry if it was a bit of overkill, fellas. I guess there's only one more question to ask: Where to next?

It's now 20:15 CDT. The meeting is closed; the bar is open (as soon as I post this I'm locking the thread; all members and new friends should adjourn to https://www.flightsim.com/forums/topic/60177-club-chachapoya-meigs-or-bust ).

Isn't the correct title, "Poobah?" (seriously, bro, congratulations!)

I'm sure it was a great explanation, but I've got rocks for brains when it comes to helicopters. I must have read more than a dozen good, detailed explanations and I still can't wrap my head around them. Cyclic (must have something to do with cycles)? Collective (sounds like some sort of Commie thing)? Swash Plate (in the sink waiting to be washed)? I did understand, "Seat," though. Last week, I set a B-58 down at Meigs in fog and a 20-knot crosswind, and still made the midfield turnoff (the chute helped). I can't hold a hover in anything for more than a couple of seconds without ending up upside-down. My other issue is my control setup. My throttles are keypresses (+ and - on the numpad), and my joystick is an old Saitek with a wrist-twist rudder. For flying rotary-wing, I can use that hack of the zip ties on the centering spring that I commented on a while back to relieve the x-y axis pressure. I can't do anything about the z axis, though, and after a half a minute or so, it sets off the arthritis in my wrist - once that gets going, I can't even hold the stick. I know this might be an imposition, but PhrogPhlyer, would you be willing to put on your CFI hat and teach me (if I can learn) once and for all how to fly helicopters? Maybe some others might like this as well. Perhaps, as Melo said, we can even do a rotary-wing event. Thanks!

So, everyone, what are our conclusions? We seem to like the informality. We will not produce a rules or bylaws set (for that matter, I'll forego a formal results document and simply leave the locked thread as a record of the meeting's results. We will have an unspecified number of Minor (<1 week duration) events and 2-3 Major (2-4 week duration) events in 2024, the administration of which will remain an open question until the events themselves are developed. [ Club Chachapoya ] is the branding for all Club threads. What would you add/delete from the above? It's now 18:00 in Chicago. I'm going to leave this question open until 20:00. Unless we still have things to discuss at that point, I will bring our Annual Meeting for 2024 to an end (and open the bar).

Exactly. Not only that, but if the burden ends up falliing on the same people all the time, they're going to reach the point where they just can't anymore.

I'm glad you brought that up, Tao - I felt this point needed more discussion. A few of us have mentioned that the one who suggests a route should, if adopted, be responsible for both participating in and administering the event. "Responsible," doesn't mean that you have to do all the work yourself, just that the work gets done. For example: I suggest the Carrera Panamericana. The choice of timing system, aircraft type, routing, flight rules, and start-finish dates are mine. But they're not, really - by the time a route is adopted, the group has already opined, probably quite extensively. While I'm the final arbiter on all things, "my route," if I don't listen to everybody and incorporate in as many suggestions as I can while keeping my concept of the Challenge intact, I'll find myself flying alone. The first thing I need to do is flesh out the ideas into some sort of document. It could be as simple as what you suggest in the quote - most of the minor Challenges probably will not go beyond that. Something like the GAAG needs a bit more. Now, if I've never done something like this, I might ask PhrogPhlyer for some help and advice, since he did such a good job with the Route 66. If he can't help, I'm still on the hook for it. When it's time for the event (including the fly-ins) to start, I'll start the thread for it, keeping in mind our branding convention. As the event progresses, I will moderate the thread. When everyone's to their chosen destination safely, I'll lock the thread. This function, at least, should not be delegated. I'm lousy at math and even worse at spreadsheets, so I ask Melo if he can give me a hand with Timing&Scoring. He says Sure. Should a day pass when he can't post the leaderboard, I'm going to have to do it. Should someone have a dispute about how their times were reported, if Melo doesn't resolve it, I'm going to have to. Note that the responsibility for administering an event doesn't have to be overly burdensome, time-wise. Help in running an event is, however, entirely voluntary, so it behooves one to stay on good terms with those who might assist. The more we all share the burden of running the Club and its events, the less likely it will be that those who've stepped up already drop out because we've become burned out. Indeed, having the Route Planner, "take the stick," for a little while is in no small part intended to relieve the burden of those who are administering the Club overall.

Great stuff, Wobbie!! I think that, if you had to pin it down, the Key Differentiator between us and "the competition" is our Culture. Come in, hang out for a while, run an event or two with us, see what you think.

Breathtaking, Tao! Thanks!!!

So do I. I hate this aspect of running an organization. The only thing that makes me more comfortable with it is a clear set of rules, so that the process is as objetive as possible. If anything has come out of our meeting for me, it's that I no longer think that more structure and formality is our best way forward at this time. Perhaps in the future, should more members join and the group dynamic get more complicated, we can revisit this. For now, I'd suggest that we keep things as informal as we can and still fly together. This presents a challenge to us all then. No structure = No forum admins = We're all forum admins. If something offends you, say so without anger. Don't wait for an administrator to call it out. If you see someone has offended someone else, chime in - if you think it's offensive, too, say so, and if you think someone's being overly sensitive, mention that, too, in the gentlest possible way. Just let the process happen organically. And if you've offended, apologize and try not to do it again. You might feel like you're in the right. You may see no need to apologize. Even if you don't, the fact that someone else here felt offended should be enough for an, "I'm sorry." And that's it.

This is a great idea, MAD1! I don't have the first idea of the technical aspects of making/editing a recording made to computer, and I don't think that the final file can be posted here in anything but a .zip (lousy actor, too), but if others who have more talent than I are also interested, let's try to take this somewhere.

Regarding Section 2, we all seem to be in general agreement about these points as well, though the consensus point is less apparent to me than for the other sections: Majors: 2-3 per year, 1 month maximum duration (not including fly-to/fly-back time). Minors: No fixed number of events, balance "What's next?" with "I need a break." The person suggesting an event is responsible for all aspects of it, as well as participating in it. What have I gotten wrong or left out?

Section 3: Outside of [ Club Chachapoya ] as the branding for all of our threads, I don't see anything new here. Unless someone thinks I'm wrong in this, let's put it to bed as well. Somewhat unrelated, but it seems to me to fit this section better than any other, we will rotate the Club Home Field.

Section 4: For Section 4.1, the consensus seems to be to keep it informal, rely on Culture, work out whatever needs to be worked out as it presents itself. For Section 4.2, again, keep it informal. For Section 4.3, If you propose a route and the rest of us adopt it, you have to administer the event. Am I right in this?

Regarding Section 1 of the Questionnaire (How can the Club best serve you?), it seems like we're all in general agreement with the three sub-points. Can we put this one to bed?

What I know about helicopters would fit in a thimble (with plenty of space left over), but at the risk of having my ignorance corrected by people who know what they're talking about, let me field this one: It's all about strength, according to something I read over at HoverControl. It takes more strength to operate the cyclic than it does the collective (or maybe it's the other way around, anyway, the stick you grab with your right hand takes more strength than the stick you grab with your left, so I've heard).

Of course, ScottishMike (fine to be proud of your own heritage, just don't diss anyone else's). I like clear rule sets because they take the arbitrariness out of any decisions that may negatively affect people, such as removing someone from the Club for putting down someone else's nationality. If I was Commodore (and in a "single level group" with "servant leadership," the Commodore's the guy who cleans the commodes), I'd be more hesitant to remove a disruptive actor if I couldn't point to a clear, previously-established reason for doing so. First and foremost, even before the flying, the Club has to be a safe space for its members to interact (our Prime Directive), and it's the Commodore's responsibility to ensure this. This said, one of the most common themes of all of the responses (except, I guess, mine) is to keep the rules simple. The best rules, laws, regulations, what-have-you, are simply the documentation of Culture, which is, for practical purposes here, the set of unwritten rules by which we are able to interact. If you all would like, we can wrap up the Rules part of the agenda by saying that we're going with Culture, and though we may occasionally be accused of being, "cliquey," by people who don't understand our Culture and don't share our values, leave the Rules unwritten. What do you think of this (please vote)?

My very brief 2 centavos re: paint programs and scenery design: I use Chasys Draw for painting. It's free, will view and open DXT and .DDS files (DXTBMP is needed to save back to DXT), respects the alpha channel, handles .psp and other layered files often found in paint kits, and it's free, though after you use it you'll probably want to make a donation Find it here: https://www.jpchacha.com/chasysdraw/ or at cnet.com. Between JGF and me, you'll surely reach your goal of designing scenery in the worst way. For just placing a few buildings, and for massive add-on object libraries, I use RWY12. It's not exactly WYSIWYG, but it's never failed me. I've used ADE - was trying to find the manual author's name because it's a superb piece of work, and discovered that I was still on version 1.5 (the current is 1.78). I'm upgrading now. The current manual was written by Helli Hauck; the original by Bob Keeshan (Captain Kangaroo?). Did somebody mention that you can paint roads with it? I'd really like to make the Nürburgring but I need something that will follow the terrain (not taxiways). This said, can we please get back on topic for a moment? I think that we can wrap the meeting up today - good, because the bar opens as soon as we're done. Thanks!

Right now, it's morning in Australia and end-of-day (or past) in the UK. Can I ask everyone to re-read the posts here and tell us where you see agreement/disagreement in what we've all written? How would you suggest we proceed, given what's here so far? I outlined a Code of Conduct in my response. What would you add/delete?

Boeing's building slides now?

With regards to the Home Airport, I'm kind of with JGF on this one - if you give me a choice of Meigs or Bust, I probably won't choose Meigs. I like the idea of rotating it. And I like the idea of flying to each other's home airports - throw a wild happening, trash their pad, then split (if those under 60 need a translation, let me know). Who wants to host first? I also like the idea of taking currently unused airports that are active in the legacy sims, such as Meigs and Tempelhof, "refurbishing" them, and taking them for Club airports.