Jump to content

Wayne Conrad 989233

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Wayne Conrad 989233

  1. I completely missed the part where you are flying a Baron G58. No FMS for you. I'm sorry--I didn't mean to insult you. PS: I am not a real pilot. I am just some schmuck on the net.
  2. Now, there's another option for you to deal with en-route boredom: Instead of accelerating, you can do some of the training that pilots do, and get acquainted with the lo-level and hi-level enroute charts. If your FMS is guiding you along the airways, you could follow along the airway charts as it navigates you along, and tune your VOR receivers to identify the airways you are following and the fixes you are crossing. When you've gotten good at that, then you should be able to use a clock or stopwatch and a calculator or E6B to estimate when you are going to p[Mod - Happy Thoughts] the ne
  3. ATC will see it. Ask first: "Center, Barnburner 123, request 4X acceleration" "Barnburner 123, approved as requested, but normal acceleration after FOO." "4X until FOO, then normal speed. Thanks, Barnburner 123"
  4. If you are VFR, you can still use the ILS by calling the approach controller and requesting a "VFR practice approach." ATC will give you vectors for the approach as though you were real IFR traffic, but will add additional words such as, "maintain VFR, no separation services provided," to remind you that it is your responsibility to continue to look outside the window and not hit anything." This phraseology is specific to the US. I don't know what it is in Europe. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  5. Here's a dirty little x-plane secret: Many of us, to taxi, switch x-plane over to daytime. We then switch back to nighttime for the actual flight. If you encountered voice on 122.80, it's because a controller opened up a voice channel contrary to standard operating procedure, not because there was supposed to be voice on that frequency.
  6. You've got my vote for ground's "contact tower" being an annoying Vatsimism that controllers should be educating pilots on. A ground controller is in the perfect position to educate the pilot. Let's use that resource rather than squander it.
  7. Great points. The issue is the limitations between VATSIM and the real world. Traffic calls in the pattern are based on positional reference to a fixed ground object that the locally based pilots are familiar with. VATSIM is limited in that regard. The other limiting factor is that the controllers, and pilots alike are, for a lack of a better word, transient controllers, and pilots. Meaning: The don't get up in the morning, and spend their day either flying or controlling that particular field. Limitations. There are two easy ways around this. One is to use cardinal directions instead
  8. I haven't ever, when listening to a tower feed, heard a traffic call for traffic behind someone. And most of the traffic calls I've heard are indeed given as "on final," "turning base," and so on," not given as "o-clock" positions. That, I think, is more the point. Not whether knowledge of the traffic came from the controller's eyeballs, binoculars, or radar. Bo, you left out the smiley, but I know you're poking fun. Anyhow, My flight instructor covered up every instrument on my panel and taught me how to fly without them. Each and every one of them, he taught me how to get from other
  9. Dennis, You missed this in the thread title:
  10. I can't answer the original question. Instead, I've got questions for the pilot. Was the field in visual conditions at the time? If so, he should have entered the pattern, looked for "light gun signals" (by PM) and landed, rather than gone missed. I have to [Mod - Happy Thoughts]ume that the field was not in visual conditions, since he went missed. My other question is, [Mod - Happy Thoughts]uming IMC, why enter the hold? There are only two good things in the pilot's tool box: Try another approach at this airport, or divert to the alternate. Neither of those are going to happen sp
  11. Ok, next request: When in the text entry window, I want to be able to type some text, then hit ESC and have the text entry window go away, then hit ENTER and have it come back with my previously typed text still in place. The reason for this request is this: If, when typing something, I need to use the keyboard to toggle an airplane control, I want to be able to interrupt my typing to do that, and then bring the text window back up and finish my typing. This would necessitate that there be some easy way to clear the text in window, for those cases when I didn't really want to resum
  12. Brian, either you or I have non-default bindings. For me, TAB toggles the big ol' message window, * brings up the text-entry window with the last message sender callsign, and ENTER, if I recall, brings up the text-entry window with nothing in it.
  13. Here's a request; I hope it's easy. Right now, TAB shows and hides the text chat window. But not if the text-entry window has the focus. Can the TAB key be made to show/hide the text chat window even when the text-entry window is displayed and has the focus?
  14. Ain't much worth it. The performance gains are marginal, the time you will put into it considerable and the potential for destruction real. It used to be that a great deal of performance margin was unused, ready for overclockers to tap into. Manufacturers don't leave so much unused these days--if you want to overlclock now, you can easily create excessive heat or unreliable operation unless you spend extra money (in cooling, especially). And that extra money could have been spent to buy faster components in the first place and run them at their rated speed without all that fuss.
  15. Apologies for the thread necromancy. But... Gerry, Would you accept a change of clearance limit without an EFC?
  16. Affirm. Comes and goes for me. Some people report that the latest version of xsquawkbox fix it, but I wonder--since it's a "comes and goes" problem, if that's not just coincidence.
  17. If you have any thoughts of trying X-Plane in the future, consider sticking with the nVidia cards. X-Plane seems to have a strong preference for nVidia cards over ATI cards.
  18. Taylor, Track-IR uses a button--I think it's F9 by default--to freeze/unfreeze tracking to make it easy to do your panel clicks without small head movements goofing you up. Many people map a mouse button or a yoke button to the freeze/unfreeze-track button to make it convenient. Doing that, it's no problem at all. Freeze, click, unfreeze.
  19. Varifocal lenses, aka progressive lenses, are akin to bifocal lenses except that they have a continuous range of focus. And one critical difference: They are blurry in peripheral vision. This may render them unsatisfactory when used with track-IR. It's not that the track-IR doesn't work. It's just that what you see when your eyes are looking left or right is blurry. Up and down is alright. So imagine this: You want to look off of your left wing, so you move you head 10 degree left to command the track-IR, and your eyes 10 degrees right so they are still looking at the screen. Track-IR
  20. If you use the 3D cockpit, X-Plane 8.6 and 9 work fabulously in any aspect ratio you happen to have. If you use the 2D cockpit, then Julien's concerns about 2D cockpit come into play.
  21. Betcha I'd have to ask on text. There are events in ZLA less busy than this one will be where I've been unable to check in due to frequency congestion. For that reason alone, I think faking the weather is a real solution to icing. Still, I went and asked. It's a good question. (Edited to add): You are exactly right. Requests for altitude change are exactly the sort of thing they're after if it's what a real-world pilot would do.
  • Create New...