Free Flight, Free Speech

That comes under my budget. I'll look at it.
Thanks for the review.

Just be aware, it is quite stiff. I like it, because when i need to pull or push too much, i know i need to trim. But helicopter pilots complain about it.

Kind regards, Vincent

I hate helis anyways

The t-flight hotas x has throttle controls too. Looking at these two.

Check if that stuff works on magnetics or carbon slips. Personally i am fine with the little throttle slider on my stick. No need for a hotas throttle quadrant for me.

Kind regards, Vincent

Roger thanks,

Let me explain the mental g/s a bit more. It might be useful for some people, because i sometimes see planes at 2000 ft above the runway at a distance of 2 miles going into an unrealistic dive towards the rw.

A g/s is nothing more than a constant descent rate from a given point towards the two big fat stripes on the rw. You can make up any mental g/s you like, as long as it has a constant descent rate. I'll explain mine here.

At 2000 ft above the rw (RA) and 8 miles out i start a descent of 500-1000 ft/min. Exact descent rate depends on the cues i get underway. If there is good visibility it goes kind of automatically. I "see" the line i need to follow. Strongest cue is the vertical angle i see the rw at. But if there is no visibility i use distance/altitude checkpoints underway, to know if i am above or below g/s.

8 mi - 2000 ft
4 mi - 1000 ft
2 mi - 500 ft
1 mi - 250 ft

This way i get a decent g/s with a vor only, and visibility at minimums. Just be sure you know the offset of the vor relative to the airport. I sometimes forgot about offset and found myself flying 5 miles at 250 ft, barely seeing the ground.

Kind regards, Vincent

The turn might not be tremenduous at Reagan, but Insbruck is really not as hard; it is just a rather more complex LOC followed by a traffic pattern, after all. And what do pilots do in Cessnas on their first solo... usually a traffic pattern!
Reagan's turn is at least 30 degrees, and you have to ''dodge'' the Pentagon and White House to get there. The approach involves a higher complexity, especially in the final stage. You have a river to follow, you have to manage vertical prodile and speed, a turn to plan and execute, and a flare.

However, in a 747, the difficulty factor raises up in both airports, so congratulations on a very nice approach and landing to Innsbruck!

KL-666 wrote:Anyway, the whole point of me being fierce on Lego accusing me of lying without any evidence, is not about me. I do not care about what Lego thinks of me. But i do not want the vicious practices of that other forum copied to this forum. I hope Lego can recognize that he has done just that, and that he and anyone else never wants to do such thing again.

Kind regards, Vincent

I do hope you don't think that I accused you of lying, because your post about glideslopes was not clear at all. The turn is sufficiently large coming with managing the vertical, horizontal (ie speed), and lateral sides to need good judgement, while 15 is fairly easy. It seemed from your post that you were referring to 15 which has hardly any turn at all, and the g/s reffering to the LDA which would lead you to either runway .

Besides, if I wanted to accuse you of lying, I'd say 'Vincent, you are lying'. Instead, I expressed a concern about how a 'small turn' and 'glideslope' could be connected to rwy 19!

Tu154 -- awesome bird, never could fly it! You have my congratulations... and hope you know Russian