lnuss

It just happened again, blank screen timed at 1 minute 5 seconds, waiting for, then "Looking up" before it got to a web page. It has happened several other times since my previous post, but 20 seconds or less.

I don't know what purpose it serves on this site, but I just had a delay (with a blank page) waiting for content.invisioncic.com- waited a full minute before going elsewhere. When I came back it was much quicker, but this is far from the first time that I've had to wait a while because of that site, though this was the longest I've seen. I think the site owners/operaters need to check up on this operation- it has a strong impact on performance.

I agree with Phrog- this is, as usual for this gentleman, a very well done presentation covering all aspects of VORs, with the bonus of DME, and including use of and limitations of each. Beautiful- thanks.

It's both: IATA: SOU, ICAO: EGHI -- IATA is what the airlines use for travelers (luggage, etc), but all pilots use the ICAO for navigation/ATC.

If ATC gives you a hold it's generally because other traffic is in the way. And, except in certain situations (don't know if the sim is different), only one aircraft may be on the approach at a time. So execute the hold and see if they will clear you for the approach after a while -- depending on traffic it could be 10 minutes or longer, but (don't know about the sim) you should receive an "expect further clearance" time. Perhaps additional info could help us explain more, as flapman asks, but the above is generally what to expect in real life. I've not used ATC in any of the sims to know how closely they follow real world practice.

So THAT's what happened to Grammar...

I'll second the ORBX recommendation for FSX (or for P3D V2, also) as being rather special. Try the demos to see how it is to fly in the regional sceneries (neat stuff) and you can try some of the free airport sceneries, but they work best with the various regional sceneries, since elevations (among other things) change with the regional sceneries. In many areas, even within FSX or P3D, these ORBX sceneries will look almost photographic, and there are lots of interesting unexpected items, such as farm implements in many farm fields, occasional animated animals (cow, deer, etc), and much more, including improvements in most airports within the region. I have all of their regions for North America (SoCal to South Alaska), along with several of their detailed airports, and it's great stuff.

Yes- I don't know what software you use for that, but I've had my share of several hour exports with Pinnacle Studio. And I agree with Phrog that it's a well done (and well worth it) effect, showing the way it works very well indeed. And just for those not up on the effects in real life, different aircraft will behave in different ways- for example the Super Cub I used to own (even at max gross wt) would lift off shorter and climb at a steeper angle with half flaps than with no flaps, and with full flaps even shorter and steeper yet, making a full flap takeoff useful in some circumstances, as well as being fun. Density Altitude can change that picture too, even for the same aircraft. I love what you're doing with these various videos, from basic maneuvers to IFR stuff, to type-specific stuff, etc. great job all around. Thanks much!

Nicely done, as usual Dick. It's a great look at how students must be trained and fly the X-C (cross country) in today's environment. When I saw the title of this one it reminded me of my early student cross country flights in 1969. I note that today's required endorsement layout is a lot different from the way it was done in my student days (1969), with specified wording required. My CFI's endorsement for my first X-C was: "OK for solo X-C from Johnson field to Bloomington, Illinois and return" -- quite different than the one you (of necessity) included above. My first X-C was relatively easy, from Johnson Field (a farmer's grass strip just southeast of Joliet, Ill) to Bloomington, Ill., about 80 miles one way. In the Aeronca 11AC Chief (middle pic below) there was no choice but to go dead reckoning, since it had no radios, nor even an electrical system, but there was a "concrete omni" (I-55) just a bit west (though out of sight on my route). Thankfully I never did get within sight of it (or need to). The flight planning (and visual navigation) on a sectional was essentially the same thing as you describe above so very well. The 2.5 hour round trip entry in my logbook included a signature from someone on the ground stating "ARR BMI" and his signed name. Exciting stuff! You sure brought back some great memories as I read through the article -- thanks.

"Realistic," in terms of flight models, varies with the aircraft. Within the limitations of the sim, some come close and some are wildly out of whack, but they tend to be as good overall as those I've seen in FSX and in P3D through V2.4, but I can't compare to 2020 since I've never seen it (except pix). "Eye candy," out of the box, is none too great but there are many add-ons that make considerable improvement. But some of this depends, too, on your mental "immersion" since that's a needed ingredient for any of the sims, and with some add-ons the results can be really nice. So although the later ones offer more improved potential in add-ons, FS9 isn't bad at all, and it doesn't stress a computer as much as the later ones.

Are you thinking I use FS2020? Nope- I've never even seen it operate. Nor do I praise it nor condemn it- same for FS9. I just answered a question.

Interesting- so you reply instead of him. Himmm... Perhaps a re-phrasing???

For some folks, it could actually be that they want to help folks having trouble, and they still remember lots of helpful things about previous (for them) sims. Perhaps some of them use multiple sims and want info if it becomes available. There may be other perfectly valid (for each individual) reasons, whether they makes sense to you or not.

There is some great information for you above. Mrzippy is right that your son's age will affect what you do at this point. The sim choices as described above pretty much cover it, and have laid it out pretty well, but I'd add one thing, that the computer you have/buy will also make a difference in your choice of sim, since MSFS2020 and X-Plane will need more computing power than FSX does. You'll also need to think about how to control the sim, since using a keyboard is very awkward and doesn't provide a very satisfying experience, but you can start with an inexpensive joystick (or maybe a yoke) and rudder pedals (not required, but IMO important). I'll also echo the above about the EAA (find a local chapter through eaa.org), both for the Young Eagles program (for kids 8 to 18) and for getting around aircraft with adult guidance and hands on experience. And if your son also has any thoughts of the military the Civil Air Patrol (CAP) could be an excellent choice. Besides some studies about aviation it offers several orientation rides in powered aircraft and, in some areas, additional orientation rides in sailplanes (gliders). CAP Cadets wear Air Force uniforms with special insignia, learn military customs and courtesies and drill and ceremonies, as well as getting some good training in leadership. And again, I'll echo Nels' comments about learning to fly. As a former flight instructor I can guarantee a lot of frustration and development of bad habits (aviation wise) that are time consuming to break in real aviation if an airliner is the starting point and main experience in the sim. Flying is, in most respects, counter-intuitive since the complete environment in the air is nothing like experience on the ground, but properly taught the basics can be picked up fairly quickly, and the built in lessons in the sims can help quite a bit. Best of luck...

Given that there are over 110K posts between the FSX and FS2004 forums over the last 20 or so years (plus whatever was not brought over from the old system), and 31K or so in MSFS2020 over the last 3+ years, perhaps the new folks are mostly over there with the newer sim. The Outer Marker is similarly barren. Also, if I recall correctly, the OM and Newcomer sections were at the top on the old system, instead of being down here out of the way.

That sure reduces your scan time...

With a search on the web for "Piper J-3 manual" I had no trouble downloading one. Same thing for the Aeronca 11AC Chief. I've also gotten the following online, so far: Aeronca Champ_7AC_POH.pdf Aeronca__11ac_chief.pdf Aeroprakt a22 flight manual.pdf Beechcraft A36 POH I-IV General-Limitations-Emergency Proc-Normal Proc.pdf Beechcraft Bonanza F33A Pilots Operating Handbook.pdf Beechcraft Bonanza_AFM.pdf Beechcraft-Bonanza-A36-AFM.pdf Bellanca 8KCAB N215RV Flight Manual.pdf Bellanca 8KCAB N215RV Owner Manual.pdf Cessna 172S Skyhawk Information Manual Searchable.pdf Cessna 180k_poh.pdf Cessna C170 Owners Manual.pdf Cessna C182S_POH.pdf Cirrus-SR22 POH.pdf Corvalis-350-G1000_poh.pdf Diamond DA202-C1-Rev-28.pdf Diamond DA62 70125e-r4-complete.pdf Douglas C-47 Manual pfoi.pdf Husky-A1B-POH.pdf J-3C Cub owners manual.pdf j3c65.pdf Kodiak100_POH.pdf Lake-Owners-Manual-Original.pdf manuel_tecnam_p2002_jf.pdf Meyers Interceptor 200DOwner's Manual.pdf Mooney M20R oe-kgg_m20r_ovation_poh.pdf P-51D-manual-5april44.pdf PA-24 ComancheN5448P_POH.pdf PA-28-161 Warrior II.pdf pa32 Saratoga II POH.pdf Partenavia P68R_AFM_NOR10.707-30C REV27.pdf Piper Super Cub ownersmanual.PDF Piper-PA-30-C-FCDI.pdf Piper_PA-28-180E.pdf POH VL-3B-3 sn VL-3-71.pdf SC POH-1-1-21_SkyView LSA.pdf Starship Airplane Flight Manual.pdf Super Cub ownersmanual.PDF T-34B_NATOPS_Flt_Man_NAVAIR_01-90KDB-1.1981Mar01-Change2.pdf Once again, top speed is always TAS, not IAS. IAS is NOT "almost universally used" for many things, though it is universal for such things as stall speed, Vy, max flap speed, etc. Get used to it not being IAS for everything. And I did offer additional explanations that you can try for other cases...

This, of course, is the ultimate answer for each aircraft, but for many older aircraft such as the Schweizer 2-32 and the Piper J-3 Cub the POH isn't exactly what they've made standard for newer aircraft, and lacks a lot of the information. In fact the 2-32's manual is labeled: THE 2-32 SAILPLANE FLIGHT - ERECTION - MAINTENANCE MANUAL It gives some quite detailed information regarding speed vs altitude vs rate of climb/sink vs distance, etc. in the form of graphs and tables but also gives information in normal text for liftoff speed, minimum towing speed and some other things. The 2-33 manual gives even less information, though in the same forms. The above is pretty much true even for older Cessnas and such, though they tend to be closer to today's manual style. On the Piper Super Cub, the performance section of the 1977 manual contains exactly one graph (see below) and many of the performance parameters are embedded in the text, such as shown below. So 1970s and before may have quite a variation of layouts and information. So it's far from "one size fits all..."

For some things that is true, such as never exceed speed, but TAS is useless for stall speed, best rate of climb Vy, and the like, regardless of altitude. Use TAS is correct, but it doesn't have to be in knots, though that tends to be the international standard these days. Which is completely false if taken literally, but in the sense they meant it's sometimes true. What that really means is that IAS (CAS) is all that is needed to keep the aircraft flying safely (avoid stalls, use Vy and Vx, flap extension, etc., etc. You still need TAS and GS for navigation purposes, among other things, and when you get into the higher altitudes and speeds mach becomes significant. So "it all depends" is the answer, since all of the various measurement types have their uses, and are significant for at least one purpose. Don't try to lock in on a single item. Most things in aviation are not intuitive, and "depend...". Addendum: I should have mentioned that mach is a function of TAS, though its value changes with temperature (therefore altitude), and becomes important for structural safety at higher speeds and altitudes.

Stall speed is generally stated as IAS (properly CAS, or Calibrated AirSpeed), while cruise and top speed are usually listed as TAS. In addition, Vne (Never Exceed) is IAS (CAS), as are gear and flap extension speeds, etc. So it depends. The speeds that are related to flying the aircraft are generally IAS while the speeds for advertising and navigation are generally TAS. The ones listed in IAS (generally) are that way because they will be the same regardless of density altitude (that is, of the ambient air pressure, temperature, etc.) and affect aircraft safety, etc. and using TAS in those cases would be misleading, at best, accurate only under one set of conditions (usually standard atmosphere).

For what it may be worth, I just came across this page related to the P-47 power curve: https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/performance-analysis-p-47.17937/

Sound and feel would play a big part, along with whatever I could understand of the instrumentation available. Trial and error, taxi a bit, see how it feels, gradually adding more power a bit at a time, perhaps move the controls around a bit when speed is up somewhat. The slow down, stop, start again, adjust for whatever might seem needed from the aircraft behavior. And I'd always keep in mind that, typically for recips, 75% power seems to be max cruise for normal operations and usually it's full power for takeoff, often applied gently with higher-powered aircraft, smoothly with all aircraft.

Yes, I watched that show as a kid -- fascinating! And I watched the first episode again last week on YouTube. Of course Sky King was another that we watched (earlier we listened to on the radio) in that time. Great memories...

Yes, well-practiced mistakes are hard to "un-learn." That includes staring at the panel and many other things. Probably worse for whirlybirds...

When I saw the title of this thread I immediately thought of Paul's site, but you beat me to it. It's a great place to visit and there are ever so many former airports that are now shopping centers or housing developments. It's sad. I wasn't shocked, but some that I used to inhabit and others I visited a lot are now closed. For example, in the Northern Illinois section, the field where I learned to fly is gone (a farmer's field), Johnson Field*. Also in Albuquerque there are three fields on his site that I used: Coronado (4AC), Alameda (Q64) and Valencia County (E20, actually near Belen, south of ABQ). Another was Harvey McGuire's small field along the Rio Grande just south of ABQ, but I can't find any info on it at all. It was snug for a C-172. I even ferried a J-4 for him once. The pic below was a hangar party at his field, Harvey in the black vest at left. ================================================= * The second pic below is of the Aeronca Chief I trained in at Johnson Field.