lnuss

Glad it worked for you -- thanks for getting back to us.

22 minutes ago, jgf said:

In the axes window you can assign the "slider" (what it calls my throttle) to any single engine, but you cannot assign all engines to it.

Look at the next-to-bottom picture in defaid's post above, where it shows Throttle axis -- assign that but DO NOT assign the engine [1234] selections shown in the bottom picture. I suspect assigning to one of those limits you, but without those assigned you have all effectively selected.

17 hours ago, jgf said:

Keyboard E+1, E+2, E+ 1 and 2 in quick succession, does nothing. 

This sounds as if you need to reassign the keyboard keys for engines.

I don't see anything usual, but I just got back here. It was normal when I was on here a couple of hours ago, too.

Well, given that it was published in 2008, and he says FS (but not which version), and looking at the pix, especially the water, it's most likely FSX.

21 hours ago, Sweetd31 said:

In your case, I see turn heading 127 at 2400 feet, is procedure to just trust the DME and go around if you don't see threshold markings by your decision altitude to go around? I imagine this could be nerve racking in real life. (it was nerve racking in the sim, I got saturated and crashed)

Without the full ILS  you'll use MDA (Minimum Descent Altitude) instead of DA.

21 hours ago, Sweetd31 said:

So if I understand correctly, by the time I reach 150 kts I should be roughly 750 feet at an attack of three degrees,

When you are discussing angle of attack, be sure you don't leave out the word angle -- when I first read this I wondered if you meant descent angle of 3º (typical glide slope). A nice abbreviation that leaves no doubt, though is AOA (or AoA). And do note that not all aircraft have an AoA indicator, though it's great to use one when available.

Addendum: I'd missed seeing Phrog's latest post -- so glide slope is what the 3º was referring to.

On 5/20/2024 at 4:13 PM, Sweetd31 said:

Consider X-plane as well, I hear it has cut above flight models compared to FS2020

So much, in both sims, has to do with how much time and effort the developer did to make it right. I have FSX aircraft that a friend (RIP) developed so that they'll even spin and do decent snap rolls (both tough to get right), among other things. They far exceed anything I have encountered in X-Plane, and while XP may have default aircraft that are a little better than FSX default ones, they both are able to have decent flight models if the developer knows what he's doing beyond physical appearance.

So first impressions aren't always correct...

RIP Bud.

His autobiography To Fly And Fight is an enjoyable read and, along with Yeager by Chuck Yeager and Forever Flying by Bob Hoover provides a very good look at the European air war in WW II, as well as an excellent look at postwar test flying from an inside perspective. Those three books are, to me, a core "trilogy" of aviation, along with Ernest Gann's Fate is the Hunter and a couple more, to get an uncommon perspective on WW II and the Korean War eras.

https://www.military.com/history/clarence-bud-anderson-last-world-war-ii-triple-ace-dies-102.html?ESRC=eb_240521.nl&utm_medium=email&utm_source=eb&utm_campaign=20240521

7 hours ago, musky said:

In the radio stack, for instance, I tune into Heathrow tower live ATC in the active window, and 122.80 in the standby window.

I Get no response from Heathrow but if I switch 122.80 into the active window and Heathrow into the standby window, Heathrow responds.

Sounds as if the two functions are reversed. Try with some more known freqs both in stby and in active and see if the same switch occurs -- if so, then

the active and stby functions are reversed in that radio.

2 hours ago, defaid said:

May I respectfully point out that you've posted in the FS9 screenshots forum?

It seems to be in FSX now.

7 hours ago, ViperPilot2 said:

it's in Meter Bands instead of MHz or KHz.

As Nels said, it's in wavelengths. So the 40M band has a wavelength in the area of 40 meters, and the allocated ham freqs there are from 7.000 MHz to 7.300 MHz. 6M is around just over 50 MHz, 2M is around 146 MHz, etc.

But something else helps a LOT, and that is to add (as Nels said) an external antenna. Keeping in mind that antennas are usually ½ or ¼ wavelength, so a 40M antenna would be 10 or 20 meters (times 3) and you're getting around 30 to 60 feet for a proper antenna. But just a 10 foot length of wire for receiving can make a big difference. Note that a ¼ wave 2M antenna would be around 19 inches, or so.

Hope this helps a bit.

8 hours ago, MAD1 said:

I thought amateur radio had died a lot, even though there are active clubs including in my local area, but the Internet put paid to it. Not so, still very active groups, mostly old guys, but shock horror, now I'm an old guy! (My callsign was VK2MDO, back in the 1990s

On many weekends the contests get so bad that 40M is too crowded to find a QSO, and even during the week QRM sometimes is a problem. Of course the upper bands (6 10, 15, etc) need condition to be right to get very many openings. So no, it's far from dead. In fact, amateur TV (including High Def) is still going strong in some areas (obviously not DX though).

1 hour ago, Nels_Anderson said:

 

I don't know if you've noticed yet, but there is a very high cross-over between people interested in aviation and amateur radio. So much so, that at my local pilot's group meetings the topic of discussion is often radio, and at my weekly ham radio lunches we're often talking about flying. It's fun to combine the hobbies, i.e. operate a radio while flying. I got my first airplane ride because of that, many years ago.

Yes, my first realization about that was in the '70s when I was in Albuquerque.  A flying friend periodically flew his C-170 to the Denver area for hamfests, at least 2-3 times a year, in addition to other places. There are other overlaps, too- motorcyclists are quite common among pilots, as are musicians (I've had a few jams here and there).

One member of our daily morning 40M net is a corporate pilot, flying a Falcon 7, and literally travels all over the world. Once in a while we chat with him airborne, and he checks in occasionally (listening only) via SDRs (Software Defined Radios), basically a way to listen over the internet. He was in the Maldives a few days ago, then Rome, etc.

At least four others on the net are pilots, some currently inactive, and they range from Florida to Oklahoma and Texas, and one builds and flies RC models.

I've had an excellent experience over the years with the Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog. It's rugged, uses hall effect transducers eliminating the occasional problem from the more commonly used pots, and has enough buttons, etc. to do most commands I needed hands off. Love it!

Wobbie and Randy, please note in my previous post above that the problem has disappeared, so you are unlikely to see it no matter which browser you use. It was only there overnight, then disappeared sometime between 6:24 AM and 7:51 AM MDT yesterday morning.

Well, I'm now on Waterfox 6.0.13 and it seems to be fine. Chrome is now working, too. Guess it has cleared up.

Thanks Charlie.

What has changed here in the last day or so? Starting yesterday Waterfox (a Firefox derivative)  version 6.0.13 won't load the forums. I'm using version 2022.11, which obviously works OK, to make this post. Chrome Version 109.0.5414.120 (Official Build) (64-bit) gives an "HTTP error 500" "This Page Isn't Working." Firefox 109.0.1 (64-bit) works OK.

Both Waterfox 6.0.13 and Chrome 109.0.5414.120 are trying to go to "https://www.flightsim.com/admin/install/" (Huh??) even when I copy and paste the URL from Waterfox 2022.11, which is the version I'm typing on.

This is all on Windows 7 Pro. And the bookmarks on the failing browser versions have this URL: https://www.flightsim.com/forums/

which works fine for this browser I'm using.

Something has changed folks.

Glad you go it working -- and thanks for the feedback. That always helps with future problems.

I concur with Mark- that's the signature of a software problem, not hardware. Since you had been running the program for years without the problem, it appears that something in your software got changed or corrupted. So as other mention above, more info is needed so you need to make copious notes about exactly what happens when -- even the most trivial detail might be important.

12 hours ago, Lazerson said:

I think it's a franchise, there's still one at KMYF in San Diego.

The web shows there's still one in Miami, FL, too. https://www.94miami.com/

12 hours ago, Lazerson said:

Is that a Thorp next to your super cub?

I'm not sure- that's over 20 years ago, and I can't quite tell from the picture. It certainly is similar in appearance but there are a few others that look similar and I don't have all the details memorized.

3 hours ago, ViperPilot2 said:

Those are some awesome photos there, Larry!

 

A nice place is The Perfect Landing Restaurant at Centennial Airport. There are great views of the Runway and Ramp, and they have great food.

Is that the current name of the one above the Jet Center? If so I've flown in there a couple of times, though it's been over 20 years ago.

27 minutes ago, ViperPilot2 said:

@lnuss Larry, did you ever eat at the 94th Aero Squadron?

A couple of times- food was pretty good, decor was great and plane watching was decent. For others who don't know, the 94th Aero Squadron was a nice restaurant at Denver's Stapleton Airport (since replaced by Denver International), with an excellent view of runways. There are some others, too, at least in San Diego and Miami.

Another place I enjoyed (not quite so fancy and it's been over 20 years now) was the restaurant at the Greely, CO airport- used to fly in occasionally for breakfast (yummy breakfast burritos) or lunch (wonderful big, juicy hamburgers), with a nice view of the airport.

Below is the L-21 (military version of Super Cub) I had back then at Greeley- the tower looking thing housed the restaurant -- Greeley didn't have a control tower. In the 3rd pic you can see we're not the only ones there for breakfast. In the 4th pic we're turning base to final for GXY's runway 09 (now 10 because of magvar shift).

Paul certainly has had a wonderful website for many years now- he does a great job. I might suggest to developers who build FS airports that they submit to Paul any information that they find in other research, too, whether Paul has it listed (yet) or not. He always welcomes additional information about his listed fields, as well as about new listings.

According to this site: https://gsplanestuff.com/products/telex-a-610-and-mrb-600-headset-technical-data-sheet-circa-1976

the data sheet for the MRB-600 was circa 1976. With a carbon mic, that's quite a likely time frame, perhaps near the end of carbon mics before the electrets, etc. were more common.

As Phrog asked, what model- they made a lot of them. I still have one of their active noise canceling units from the '90s, model ANR-1D, an excellent unit I bought when I still owned a Cub. And as Phrog also indicated, they don't tend to do changes of aircraft stuff on a model year basis (just like ham radio), rather the development costs are fairly high to make them acceptable to the FAA/FCC and the sales volumes are very low compared to normal consumer products, such that they make essentially the same product for many years, perhaps adding a new model once in a while, but nothing regular.

If there's a data plate you can look at you might get a clue, but with the actual model number (including any prefix/suffix) it might be possible to determine a range of dates when that model was made.

Glad you found a solution, Bob.

4 hours ago, PilotBobUK said:

I wonder if my instructor would accept a printout of the flight analysis in order to sign off the approach? 

Hmmm...