Jump to content

Ludwig

Members
  • Content Count

    350
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Ludwig last won the day on March 19

Ludwig had the most liked content!

About Ludwig

Richthofen Pilots
Oesau Pilots
Schmenkel Pilots
  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 05/30/1956

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Richland Hills, TX

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. .....HEY... it SAYS A$ton Martin..... you probably hit the button under the top of the shifter and ejects your wife out of the house. 😎
  2. I see the wolf from Tex Avery.... another favorite....
  3. I just saw a youtube video showing the Garmin nav setup with the Auto pilot for a C-172.... my ..... goodness... I simply can not imagine. I was ferrying them from ICT with holes in the panels because the new owners would put in their own instruments and radios.... I feel so old... I can only assume that the Garmin is more expensive than the cost of the airplanes I was ferrying back in the 70's. I teach the Garmin 1000 and 3000 and we are up to the software 2.xx load on the 3000... which has the ROAAS, and the EDM which are the two big features (sorry.. ROAAS is Runway Overrun Awareness and Advisory System, and the EDM is the Emergency Descent Mode) The ROAAS is a big deal and a really hot topic with the FAA, and something that they are pounding really hard due to the number of overrun incidents. The EDM is the first step towards the automation with auto-throttles coming right behind it because no more mechanical connection to the engines through the power levers measured in PLAs. We are not allowed to call them "throttles" any more and believe me... it is akin to calling someone you have known your whole life by a different name. Now you can learn the Garmin on the MSFS... maybe it will make my job easier... HAH! I have to fail that stuff to make them fly the jet.... everything is done in automation. I was a Guinea pig in the 737 MAX (ooops... we can't call it that any more... now it is the 737-8) a couple of weeks ago... that's another story.
  4. Exactly correct, to get a 172 or 152 to spin you must hold it in the spin. The moment you release the controls it will come out. Remember the washout in the wingtip incidence... that was a BIG deal when the plane was produced early on. Spin training was something we all thought SHOULD be taught, just in and of itself.... but it was rare 50 years ago and non-existent now.
  5. ........ or a HOSPITAL........
  6. I have really enjoyed reading this thread and knowing you guys are having so much fun with it. Hey do me a favor and let me know if you find something for a Phenom 100 or 300 (EMB-500, EMB-505) because it is really handy for clients that need to spend some time being familiar with the jet. I have been recommending low time guys to follow this path (they can afford the jet, the sim should be low cost) and it really does help them procedurally and general familiarization. We are seeing guys come through with 500 hours total time getting typed in the jet.... wow......
  7. Vernichtungswahrscheinlichkeit Als Kind spielte meine Familie kein Scrabble, weil wir nicht genug Bindestriche hatten....
  8. Nice seeing the Z-car in the still shot.
  9. Love this sport but have lost interest in it since around 2000 after growing up watching it 1966 on.....
  10. No question about Hamilton's penalty, Albon had him cold and he knew it.
  11. When I did these events some years ago in RoF… the winds NEVER changed... that made it super easy for me to be setup and ready and I could nail the target with 100% reliability. If the winds change from week to week, you will significantly change the equation. If you are consistently off in length, you may need to be using the AGL altitude when setting up. Reference the MSL altitude of the target and subtract that from the altitude you set on the sight. I have not bombed in FC so I don't know if it factors this in... but if you are at 3000 feet and your target is at 400' MSL then you would set 2,600 on your sight to account for the difference. It makes a tiny difference, but if you start adding up those tiny differences, you find out why you are not hitting exactly as you should. Again, this is WAY more accurate than real world bombing.
  12. Pragr is exactly correct, setting the bomb sight is the last key to this exercise. The more precise you enter the information (and maintain it) the more accurate you will be. Watch your track over the ground to determine the most accurate 0 wind angle and then go from the target backwards to find your IP.... anything obvious will do. Something easy to recognize and quickly align yourself. Once you line up on that it's a duck walk to the target. Lastly, your actual method of triggering the bomb release can make a difference of 50' at an altitude of 3000m. If you are using a mouse, or keyboard or joystick button it needs to be consistent. In the Gotha I was taking out single tank targets at 3000m as long as the above conditions were met. It takes practice, you don't need vehicle targets, a road intersection a single tree, really anything that will allow you to observe your fall of shot will give you the information you need. If you have a particularly difficult mission target, drop a single bomb on the way to the target and observe it. Winds are the same across the map, and at altitude. In RoF you could put in different wind speeds and directions at layers, but the program only reflected the one speed and direction. Tracking/observing through the site to determine your zero wind path to the target makes it all come together. The computer allows for incredibly precise bombing that could never be achieved in the real world even with todays delivery methods. (dumb bombs)
  13. Congratulations to you sir, I hope you move on to a fulfilling and enjoyable career. It's a lot of work eh? Good for you!
  14. I hate to be a scrooge.... but that looks so similar to some actual footage.... I mean... REALLY similar.... that will be most impressive if it is true to the game.
  15. Anything going that fast with early wing design is going to be dealing with compressibility... the point of the phrase is going that fast..... which is really a lot of fun... Fly the Zeke, deal with the lack or armor, fly anything German in FC and deal with dev induced penalties, try the fastest piston fighters of the war and deal with compressibility. P-38 has been given a bad rap in a lot of flight sims typically for lacking maneuverability.... not true. A friend of mine that flew a P-47 with me, also flew with the P-38 and said they had a real tough time with each other, no one getting a clear edge. Both of them would out turn the Mustang easily. I talked with a P-38 group at a reunion and they said that if they got in too close with the Zekes or Tonys that they would go into a climbing spiral and the Japanese fighters could not match it because of the torque in the climb. The 38 having contra rotating props had the balance on it during a steep climbing spiral. He said that they could just keep spiraling up until the Japanese pilot was forced to stall or abandon the effort.
×
×
  • Create New...