Jump to content

Ludwig

Members
  • Content Count

    358
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    22

Everything posted by Ludwig

  1. "Hey whatcha doinMan..... "I'm just watchin TV man.... Watchin TV...??? whatya watchin Man? I don't know.....it's a movie about indians but it's really boring.... Hey Man....that's not a movie Man....that's a TEST PATTERN..... Hey.... far out.......
  2. HAH.... we saw this every night at 11:00 PM when KENS CHANNEL 5 went OFF THE AIR..... and they would play the Star Spangled Banner and then read the poem "High Flight" while showing film of a 104 zooming and rolling through the clouds. Kids today don't know what "going off the air" means.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGj6deaINxM
  3. .....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. 😎
  4. I see the wolf from Tex Avery.... another favorite....
  5. 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.
  6. 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.
  7. ........ or a HOSPITAL........
  8. 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......
  9. Vernichtungswahrscheinlichkeit Als Kind spielte meine Familie kein Scrabble, weil wir nicht genug Bindestriche hatten....
  10. Nice seeing the Z-car in the still shot.
  11. Love this sport but have lost interest in it since around 2000 after growing up watching it 1966 on.....
  12. No question about Hamilton's penalty, Albon had him cold and he knew it.
  13. 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.
  14. 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)
  15. 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!
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. I thought the GLOC was much better than the last video I saw (from Barton) it was manageable... my opinion (who cares) is that it is still a little heavy... it should come on a little slower but that's just me. I was most impressed with the fact that the stricken planes are burning... this is something that was 90% wrong in RoF and it really makes a big difference. The reason is that once the plane catches fire it was considered destroyed. That means that no one else could get credit for the kill... i.e. less guys diving in front of you trying to take credit. Oh sure, that still happened but not as much. I never saw a burning plane I shot that I didn't get credit for downing that aircraft. I would be interested if you guys have had the same results? I assumed that they reduced the chances (another one of those lovely updates about the time they porked the gunnery) because of the graphic load on the program... but if you go back and read Manfred's book and his list of kills about 60 out of 80 definitely burned and he alluded to more than that.
  19. If you want to see it done properly... give CLoD a try... the modeling there is really pretty darn good. I have flown numerous biplanes and spray planes, the T-6 Texan and the P-51D along with the T-38 and the F-16. I discount the jets because of the G suit involved... the principles remain exactly the same but the G suit obviously is a game changer and the forces are more easily achieved. We routinely gave rides in the PT-17 Stearman and the T-6 and it was great fun to give the guy a considerable ride. The physiology is pretty basic, the distance between the head and the heart is what it is all about. A long tall Texan will drop out faster than a short fat guy that eats a lot of red meat. High blood pressure will keep you alert (assuming you don't pop your cork) better than a taller, skinny person. Your head location makes a difference as well. If you are turning and twisting your head around you can side-load your self and THAT will become really apparent SUPER fast. In jets you actually let go of the throttle quadrant and slam your hand on the canopy so you can force yourself up and back to wedge your helmet against the canopy and seat in order to see better and take some of the load off your neck. Your straps won't let you move much but you have probably loosened up some by that point. (They don't show you THAT in the movies) Fast onset... sure... it can happen but it also is typically the first pull and you are at your strongest and you recover quickly assuming you don't go under, but typically you see the onset and react. Sure, there are lots of videos out there of guys in jets that drop like a stone and the IP has to take the jet, but again force multipliers here and G suits. Typically if you are involved in ACM you are limited to 6 Gs and if you exceed it, you are really close to bending the jet which will get you a visit to the head shed. The more you pull, over a period of time the more debilitated you become and therefore more likely to go under. All kinds of stories about guys trimming their plane nose up when making a high speed pass with a pull up so if they blacked out the plane would tend to climb and slow down and allow them time to recover. I heard these stories... but...… yeah... maybe... don't know.. I wasn't there. Of course the Stuka and the Ju-88 had a preset pull up... which was really pretty clever and is actually modeled in CLoD. What I saw Barton subjected to was silly... that in NO way represents anything close to what it is. You PULL G's.....emphasis on the PULL... it is a LOAD. Your arm weighs 20+ lbs and you pull 4 G's you are curling 80lbs. I can't do that. You can hang on to your stick...and support 80-100 lbs... I can do that... how much control and how precise can you be at such loading??? NOT MUCH... that is akin to being shot to pieces in RoF and still able to fly AND AIM and hit a moving target. What a load that is.... (no pun intended) We could routinely pull 3 Gs on the girls/ladies that went for a ride and they giggled and complained 4-5 Gs and they were ready to go back and land. Don't forget though that it is cumulative... and I you are pulling 3-4 SUSTAINED Gs that is way tougher than 5-6 Gs for only a couple of seconds. If you pull 6 Gs in a WWII fighter, you are really close to bending something, and the P-51 was famous for losing the use of some MGs because of G loading. The force would be great enough to bend the feeder chute for the ammo belt and allow the belt to misfeed. If you have ordinance on the wings, or fuel tanks.... ouch.... and the F-86 was famous for one tank dropping and the other not....look THAT up sometime... some pretty hairy stories of guys getting back to base with one tank hanging. All in all... it was not that much of an issue or problem or you would read more about it. Desperate times call for desperate measures so sure, some times you had to push the envelope or the end result was going to be the same and if you were stronger than the other guy you might get away with it... but simply put... IL-2 G loading is porked. Shame on them for allowing it to be so far wrong. AND... if you want to see something even worse... try NEGATIVE Gs… anything more than 1 -G will make you pray for death. It is horribly painful, and you feel like your head will explode, and you would be grateful if it did. They usually keep negative Gs out of the sim by limiting the performance of the plane (W-R-O-N-G) and not by the -G induced forces on the pilot. RoF was terrible about this, you could NEVER push over even when you were slow and the loading was minimal. You might lose the engine but the plane still performed as it should...but in RoF… they just flat limited your ability to push over rapidly. Watch the guy at the airshow fly vertical into a hammerhead and just before he gets to the top, he pushes over in a tight vertical outside maneuver. PS... as to the AIR COMBAT guys that take you up in a trainer and let you fly against someone else... great stuff... lots of fun, not too terribly expensive... but look up the safety record because more than a few of those operators have been involved in fatal crashes due to the aircraft breaking up from excessive G loading. Those are the companies that you won't find in business any more (spelled wrongful death lawsuit) which came after losing their aircraft.
  20. Good grief the GLOC is ridiculous... who determines these values??? Someone put their long necked skinny ass in a machine and give them a ride so they can get some understanding how GLOC works.... sheeeesh…..... Nice job Barton (as usual)
  21. 20° SAT but the track is 11° ???
  22. That's funny... one of my clients had a kid competing in the Legend car series that is on going...well... *was* ongoing. They are really inexpensive and use a motorcycle engine if I remember correctly. Relatively cheap compared to other types of racing. RED BULL RING and MONZA???? Really?????? So many nice short tight tracks....
  23. You can try writing to the manufacturer. Back in the old days they were extremely generous in supplying me with spare parts... pots, cables, springs, gimbals... you name it. I asked for one part and they sent me a huge collection of spares. It's worth a try. I am pretty sure that I threw away my old TM stuff... I had the FLCS system but it was PARALLEL and no one wanted it. It sat for years and when I moved I think I gave it the old heave ho... but I bet the pots were the same, maybe the gimbals. Anyway, I will take a look and see if it is in storage.
  24. I will try that thanks
  25. I just loaded the F-16 in DCS and now it crashes to desktop during the load... then I load it again and it gets in the sim and lets you be there for about 15 minutes and then it crashes again. SO... I figure it didn't like something in the F-16.
×
×
  • Create New...