Would I have survived?

[teson1]

Reggie, thanks for the comments and explanations.

But they don't do that because the FS community does not want that type of aircraft..

I for one, would love to have a real-to-life sim of a plane - I think... And you would as well, I bet!
If there's the material available to learn the proper techniques, and if I can ask stupid questions on the forums. Just would keep it a simple plane not to be overwhelmed.

The 3350 was never cheap - as I said above we can never come close to the cost factor in flying, which is so very important in the real world.

Now, how would that be - the sim fries the processor as a function of the damage to the engines. :d

[RFields]

If you had a real life sim of a Connie, you would require at least one, probably two other people to fly it.

A sim of those big old recips simply could not be flown realistically by one person.

You would have to spend close to an hour pre-flight. I never remember less than 15 minutes pre-takeoff runups and checks right before takeoff.

You would have to spend 40-80 hours with the manuals before you ever fired an engine.

The sim does a good job of giving us a close feel for some of the complexity of these big planes. But flying them was so much more than following checklists and procedures. A lot of it was experience which can only be gained in the aircraft.

I really think the Evita event was a pretty good test under near realistic conditions. Just like a real airline pilot, you made a risk/ reward decision as to how hard to push the plane. The damage modeling could have been better and penalized you more for long term engine abuse. But the fact that you are questioning your decisions and their impact shows the event achieved it's purpose.

Something Indy Car driver Eddie Cheever said once kind of sums it up "The moment I knew I was a race car owner, and not just a driver, was at Dover. I was skidding toward the wall and realized I was worried about how much the crash would cost, not how much hitting the wall would hurt."

When I take to the air in that real Light Sport Aircraft for a lesson, I am very aware that if I push the plane past the limits set by the school, it will cost me money. Hard earned green folding cash.

[teson1]

I have finally done some testing of aircraft performance with AFSD, and it seems that BSFC decreases strongly with very lean mixtures for the fs9 piston engine planes.

As this is getting quite into details of the fs9 engine model, I have started a new thread over at my usual lair.
http://forums.flightsim.com/vbfs/sho...d.php?t=200852
However, if you can help me understand this, it would be great if you could drop in over there.

Thanks,

Gunter

[buzzbee]

Thanks to the race committee for all the research that goes into the events. I don't have a lot of time to test prior to these events so the background information is useful. The fuel penalty made sense, but I am still not sure I quite grasped the payload bonus properly. I tried to estimate my fuel consumption and pick a payload that would hopefully not put me above max landing weight and would allow me to take off and land on some of the more challenging fields.

As Reggie points out, you don't have anything on the line when you are sitting at your computer, unlike when you are operating a real aircraft. It would be great if there was an engine wear model over time that could be applied to the RTW. Until then, I think it will come down to plannign and teamwork and not crashing on takeoff and landing to be succesful.


Reggie - Are you working on your Light Sport? I am very interested in that myself as I just want to fly around and control an airfram in all phases of flight and not have to pay for extensive cross country training that I will never have the money to take advantage of.

Cheers!