Classic British Flight Sim

I started flying for the VA but I was already flying for a number of airlines @ simairline.
Whilst I do enjoy flying the older types from time to time, I prefer to fly around in Fokker 50's.

Hi John,

thanks for your reply and for the information............Thinking about it, but won't be an immediate desicion!!

Kind regards Nigel.

Simon and CB..

Totally understood

Dan..
(for the rest of you.. you can see now that Dan only fly's VC10's on BOAC routes..)
The DC3's and F100's were/are legacy aircraft mate. When you set an airline up, you get a lump sum of dosh (gratis) plus a handful of aircraft to get yourself going. We've kept the DC3's as they played a big role in our postwar aviation history and I get to use Garry's INTRA and Channel paints!! Sadly for the F100's.. while they were useful (to some degree) when the airline was first formed, they really have no part in CBFS (and by that I mean Classic British Flight Services) so they've all been put up for sale. It is possible that other aircraft may be brought in to further our network but the reality is.. the timeline we fly in means we have just about all we can hope for. YES, BOAC DID use 707's as did BA when the companies were merged. Other aircraft have been under discussion including the Tristar which many here feel should be British even if its not but we feel a line has to be drawn somewhere and the purchase of American aircraft is possibly on the other side of the line.

The feasibility of us having UK aircraft based abroad is being looked at but to maintain our timeline, they would not be plonked anywhere just because the scenery is nice. Should it transpire that such places (if they can be found) used non-British aircraft, then the purchase of the correct aircraft for that particular route will be looked at

ATB

DaveB :tab:

VA is just not for me. Attempted it once and failed miserably purely because I don't have the patience to trough through the literature and work out the bare bones of it.

My type of flying is; Sit down at PC, boot-up, load FS9, create a flight, fly somewhere, land somewhere, thats it. No pressures, timetables or schedules to keep.

Its how I like it. Sorry!

i have mainly never joined a VA due to the flight time - i never get to sit on fs for two hours and nor do i wish to - i'd much prefer a short 10minute island hop or half hours tricky mountain dodge cargo run than a 3hr short-haul. i know such flights are rare - but they're there!

it's mainly because my concentration span is...well, rather small - though i can sit on a real 2hr flight quite happily looking at the scenery.

whether this VA has such short routes i don't know, you do so many i couldn't be bothered finding them in google earth or the networks airport finder thing :P

Idid My first flight on the VA today it was fantastic.
It is not as hard as it sounds on paper, I would not class Myself an expert in flightsim.
Give it a go once what have you got to lose.

Tks for your continued replies and well done Lee on your first flight Just to prove how easy it is.. Lee downloaded the Dove yesterday, did a couple of flights and then did his first live flight this evening!!

Eddie..
Appreciate what you're saying mate but the reality of FlyNET is this..

Here is your quote..
Sit down at PC, boot-up, load FS9, create a flight, fly somewhere, land somewhere, thats it. No pressures, timetables or schedules to keep.

Here is how different it would look doing a VA flight..
Sit down at PC, boot-up, Logon to flynet and book flight then logoff, load FS9, select departure airport, reduce the sim using windows logo key, double click the client software, load your fuel, max flightsim and fly the flight, parking brake on at destination airport, reduce the sim and end flight on the client.

There are no pressures as such.. just the few things already mentioned. Timetables and schedules.. well, they're irrelevant really. Your flight shows takeoff time so you aim at that but it doesn't matter if you're not there.. the same with your destination time. The times are wherever possible, authentic.. historically accurate but you gain and lose nothing by not keeping to them.

Hinch..
I don't pick 3hr flights either mate as I don't have the time to do them in REAL time. That said, many of the flights will accept sim speeds up to x4 and while I choose NOT to use them.. I understand why many of the guy's who fly longhaul DO. We don't all have 7hrs available to run transatlantic flights so its horses for courses. One chap on FlyNET (not on our VA) managed 217hrs last month and I can't imagine for the life of me how ANYONE has 217hrs spare per month to fly flightsim!! He is definately the exception to the rule!! The longest flights I can afford to do are around the 2hr mark but most are 1hr.. 1hr15 or less than an hour. Many of my Rapide and Dove flights are around the 30min mark

It still seems that many of you are under the mishaprehension that flying for CBFS is difficult and time consuming. My problem is that it is more time consuming for me to tell you all how quick it is than it is for you to do it yourselves. How long does a mouse click take.. a couple of mouse clicks take?? It takes me around a minute to book a flight and logoff FlyNET. The sim.. well, load times there depend on how much garbage you have installed but this is a feature you'd have to endure whether you are flying a VA flight or not. Reduce the sim, open the FlyNET client (a double mouse click.. check the flight and take on fuel. You fly the flight.. that doesn't change however you want to fly it as you have the freedom to route exactly as you see fit. You land.. turn off the runway and hit the parking brake.. reduce the sim.. end the flight on the Client and that's your lot. The whole exercise takes no more than 2mins longer than if you flew 'offline'

Regardless.. I'll not push the VA indefinately as I'm sure many of you want to jump in the sim and fly whatever it is that takes your fancy. That's fine and you can do that anytime as I do. If you want to try something with a little more structure, something above and beyond what the basic sim offers, then at some point you might like to try it. I defy ANYONE to tell me it's difficult and time consuming because that simply is not true

ATB

DaveB :tab:

DaveB wrote:It still seems that many of you are under the mishaprehension that flying for CBFS is difficult and time consuming.
DaveB :tab:

As a relatively 'new-join' to the VA I can only support what Dave B says - it really is no more difficult than flying on your own offline. I have flown for a number of VAs where, amongst other things, there were a minimum number of flights/hours per month, no time compression was allowed etc etc, and I have to say that so far I have found CBFS VA to be the easiest to fly for from a pilot's point of view. The routes and choice of aircraft give you a great choice of style and type of flying, and I enjoy working out how to get to a particular airport that I fancy flying out of by piecing together different parts of the schedules. I do NOT feel pressured into completing a route on time, although I take a certain amount of pride in taking off when scheduled (Nurse! - the screens, quickly! ). I have not experienced any sort of 'elitism' - quite the reverse - my communications with 'the management' have always been speedily and courteously answered.

In short, with my past experiences, if I was asked to recommend a VA, it would be this one!


Rgds,


Colin

Hi Dave,

I know what you are saying but I am and always will be a simplist. I personally don't take FS as serious as some as see it as a way to unwind and relax.

Like already mentioned, I also don't have a very long attention span and much prefer short hops here and there. At most usually in and around the British Isles.

If there is very little difference in adding VA to the equation then why add it?

Awkward git are'nt I?

Eddie wrote:

If there is very little difference in adding VA to the equation then why add it?

Hello mate,
You are one very good reason why I hate the general public so much!!

Ease of operation has been very much to the fore with FlyNET and was one of the reasons I joined. It is as Colin (effoh) said as close to flying on your own offline as it can possibly be and this is what makes it so attractive. A lot depends on how seriously you take your flying I suppose. I don't do many of the things I could (eg.. chart the courses myself, tune the radios in to follow the course e t c) but FlyNET allows me to fly to whatever standard I like. The point is, it becomes a challenge. Where you might load the sim and jump in an aircraft and takeoff (regardless of fuel onboard and MTOW) then poodle around aimlessly landing where the fancy takes you at a rate (landing speed fpm) you don't give a monkey's about.. the structure of FlyNET gives you the opportunity to chase the numbers a little bit more. You DON'T takeoff with full tanks if it's not required as you pay for the fuel (the airline does anyway) so you start looking at perfecting your fuel loading to make the max possible money. The landing speed/vs is important because it bares on the service life of the aircraft so instead of throwing it on the deck, you find yourself TRYING to land as smoothly as possible to get a minimum impact on the aircraft percentage.

Put simply, what starts out as a bit of fun travelling from A to B becomes much more as you begin to take a personal pride in your flight profiles. No one will give you a rollocking for landing at 185fpm and losing .3% off the aircraft life but YOU will be angry with your performance because you landed heavy. Likewise, you will not get a rollocking for landing with say 4000kg of fuel when 2000kg would have done but.. personal pride means that next time you do that particular flight with similar wx (if you have wx on.. this is not a requirement).. you will buy 2000kg less and thus make a few more bob for yourself and the airline. Our pilots get 10% of the airline income per flight (virtual of course) so you might want to make your flights as profitable as possible because you're saving up to buy your own private aircraft. There is a lot more there than is immediately obvious but you can choose to ignore the outside factors. Try it a few times though and you'll find it hard to resist wanting to fly to a greater degree of accuracy whether it be on fuel management, on landing technique, nav planning or any of the aspects open to you as a simmer. If I land the Rapide at anything over 0fpm, I'm not too fussed if it's not too far over!! If I land it at over 10fpm.. I start to look at what I did wrong. If I land it at over 315fpm (which I have done on one occassion believe it or not) I have a right tw@t on with myself. You can always go around if things start to go badly but like a moth drawn to a lamp.. you feel the urge to make the best of a bad job and fight your way out.. getting the ac down at all costs. Btw.. my 315fpm landing in the Rapide was done at Jersey. I thought I'd be clever and land in the VC (which of course you all know I'm not a fan of) and it all went wrong due to the usual problem. I moved my view using the POV and couldn't get it back again. This was not a clever thing to do as I was crossing the threshold!! I lost .5% off the airframe for that and it was my personal pride dented in a big way. Suffice to say, I've avoided the VC at all costs since!!

There is just a little structure there and you can take it or leave it but you'll find it hard not to want to better yourself. The system doesn't make you do it or require you to do it.. it all boils down to your personal pride in getting a job well done If it's so similar to not doing it then why do it could easily be it's too difficult so I can't do it which just goes to prove, you can please some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time

ATB

DaveB :tab: