VA Crew Room
Moderators: Guru's, The Ministry
- DispatchDragon
- Battle of Britain
- Posts: 4925
- Joined: 23 Feb 2005, 01:18
- Location: On the corner of walk and dont walk somewhere on US1
- Contact:
VA Crew Room
I spoke to Ben about having a "crew room" within E&S - and He suggests making a Sticky thread for that purpose - if all are in agreement Ill make it so.
Leif
Leif
- RAF_Quantum
- The Gurus
- Posts: 2745
- Joined: 04 Jul 2004, 23:36
- Location: NE Lincolnshire UK
- Contact:
- DispatchDragon
- Battle of Britain
- Posts: 4925
- Joined: 23 Feb 2005, 01:18
- Location: On the corner of walk and dont walk somewhere on US1
- Contact:
- Garry Russell
- The Ministry
- Posts: 27180
- Joined: 29 Jan 2005, 00:53
- Location: On the other side of the wall
One thing concerning me is that it seems to be going to run as things are now
It would be better if they could be run as they were then
Procedures and routings were different and there were many more waypoints.
Landing lights wern't generally used like now and in fact it was a different world which I thought is part of the attraction.
There are many more differences I am just using examples.
Garry
It would be better if they could be run as they were then
Procedures and routings were different and there were many more waypoints.
Landing lights wern't generally used like now and in fact it was a different world which I thought is part of the attraction.
There are many more differences I am just using examples.
Garry
Garry
"In the world of virtual reality things are not always what they seem."
"In the world of virtual reality things are not always what they seem."
- Chris Trott
- Vintage Pair
- Posts: 2590
- Joined: 26 Jun 2004, 05:16
- Location: Houston, Texas, USA
- Contact:
Garry, all the other parts are valid points except the one about landing lights. If the VA is going to use FlyNET then it must comply with the rules of FlyNET which has the two landing light requirements (off above 10K, on below 1K). There is nothing that this VA can do about that unless we are willing to take the penalty for violating those rules each time we fly a flight.
-
- Concorde
- Posts: 772
- Joined: 07 Nov 2004, 06:50
- Location: Bedhampton (just outside Portsmouth), Hants, UK
Garry, you're right about procedures and routes being different in the past, but not about there being many more waypoints. There were actually far fewer waypoints - or 'reporting points' as they were called.Garry Russell wrote:Procedures and routings were different and there were many more waypoints.
This was partly because there were far fewer routes than there are today but also because published reporting points were restricted to either radio beacons (VORs, NDBs or fan markers) or intersections with specific purposes. Just because two routes crossed, didn't mean that the crossing point had a name. Today, it's the complete opposite and every single point where routes cross is required to have a 5-letter name whether it has any useful function or not. :crying:
ATB
PP
- DispatchDragon
- Battle of Britain
- Posts: 4925
- Joined: 23 Feb 2005, 01:18
- Location: On the corner of walk and dont walk somewhere on US1
- Contact:
As I understand from John (RAF Q) as far as airways routings go we can toss that out the window - seems tha you can fly just about anything you want and I quote VOR,GPS,Direct, whatever completes the task and
generates the most revenue for the "airline" - Im sorry , I have been
laboring under a total misconception , this seems to be more about generating "virtual" revenue than flying classic british aircraft in the
envoirment that they exsisted in (PeteP and I discussed this a long time
ago as to wether one could reconstruct a 30 year old airways system
on MSFS) Obviously unless someone comes along and rebuilds airports (or debuilds) to the way they were 30 years ago one will have to live with exisisting airport scenery. - Returning to the concept of virtual revenue Im sure some of you may have noticed that Flynet REQUIRES a monetary
value be placed on the aircraft - as almost ALL of the types that have been
suggested are in museums or gone entirly (with the exception of the 748)
Computing the value can only be done by finding how much the original equipment cost new - and then converting from say 1969 Sterling to
2006 Sterling - I think you can all see the problems this might bring about
- to continue within the confines of Flynet would mean that you will
bankrupt the airline very quickly , because if the folks at Flynet have done
their homework corectly the "virtual airline" program will take into things
such as fuel cost, hull depreciation, maintenance costs, and of course customer satisfaction (meaning repeat load factors) IF all these things
have been computed at real world cost of 2005/2006 then operating 35 year old equipment with highly inefficient and thirsty engines will drive
the airline into bankruptcy in next to no time.
Just thought you all would like to think on this
Leif
generates the most revenue for the "airline" - Im sorry , I have been
laboring under a total misconception , this seems to be more about generating "virtual" revenue than flying classic british aircraft in the
envoirment that they exsisted in (PeteP and I discussed this a long time
ago as to wether one could reconstruct a 30 year old airways system
on MSFS) Obviously unless someone comes along and rebuilds airports (or debuilds) to the way they were 30 years ago one will have to live with exisisting airport scenery. - Returning to the concept of virtual revenue Im sure some of you may have noticed that Flynet REQUIRES a monetary
value be placed on the aircraft - as almost ALL of the types that have been
suggested are in museums or gone entirly (with the exception of the 748)
Computing the value can only be done by finding how much the original equipment cost new - and then converting from say 1969 Sterling to
2006 Sterling - I think you can all see the problems this might bring about
- to continue within the confines of Flynet would mean that you will
bankrupt the airline very quickly , because if the folks at Flynet have done
their homework corectly the "virtual airline" program will take into things
such as fuel cost, hull depreciation, maintenance costs, and of course customer satisfaction (meaning repeat load factors) IF all these things
have been computed at real world cost of 2005/2006 then operating 35 year old equipment with highly inefficient and thirsty engines will drive
the airline into bankruptcy in next to no time.
Just thought you all would like to think on this
Leif
- DispatchDragon
- Battle of Britain
- Posts: 4925
- Joined: 23 Feb 2005, 01:18
- Location: On the corner of walk and dont walk somewhere on US1
- Contact: