Thanks Fred. When you book your PIREP hours always put down the real flying time so you don't lose out on your hours. When I process the pirep it warns me that the hours aren't right but I can override this. bones bones@xxxxxxx -----Original Message----- From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Fred Stopforth Sent: 15 April 2010 13:18 To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [jhb] Re: WT Pirep My WT flight CYXY > PANC was broken up by a few mins of sorting T/S because only 3 greens would register instead of 4 even though IVAO 'EYE' showed me as active and connected.Problem sorted with J Hill's help so I booked in my actual flying time 2hrs32mins. Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx> To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 2:08 PM Subject: [jhb] Re: VFR Flight > I've had a snotty conversation with a Dutch chap who says their airfield > database is perfect. I've told him that the database listed on the IVAO > site > is correct but that the PIREP system is using something different - but he > doesn't believe me. > > bones > bones@xxxxxxx > http://woodair.net > > > -----Original Message----- > From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf > Of Fred Stopforth > Sent: 14 August 2008 14:04 > To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: [jhb] Re: VFR Flight > > It's happened again on Pirep.Did EGSA --> EGSP. EGSP is down as > Connington > / EGSF as Sibson. Good job I've got my VFR map. Summat needs updating. > Fred > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx> > To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Sunday, August 10, 2008 8:02 PM > Subject: [jhb] Re: VFR Flight > > >> IVAO need to get their data up to date - Bedford closed a long, long time >> ago. I'll bet EGTH also throws up Hatfield instead of Old Warden. >> >> The CAA don't reissue old codes for at least ten years so it shows you >> how >> old data still gets left around. >> >> bones >> bones@xxxxxxx >> http://woodair.net >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On >> Behalf >> Of Fred Stopforth >> Sent: 10 August 2008 19:10 >> To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Subject: [jhb] Re: VFR Flight >> >> Bones, Just done EGSN --> EGSA . Put EGSV Old Buckenham as Alt Dest but >> the >> IVAO setup on the PIREP registers EGSV as Bedford / Thurleigh . ??? Fred >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx> >> To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 1:10 AM >> Subject: [jhb] Re: back home >> >> >>> Welcome back Fred. Last night was awful in the UK - only a small handful >>> of >>> pilots online in total and only Mike popped into the IOM. >>> >>> bones >>> bones@xxxxxxx >>> http://woodair.net >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On >>> Behalf >>> Of Fred Stopforth >>> Sent: 06 August 2008 23:46 >>> To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>> Subject: [jhb] Re: back home >>> >>> Hi Bones,Back home after a good 6 days in Madrid and will be reporting >>> for >>> duty when am sorted after looking thro the e-mail sack. Fred >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Bones" <bones@xxxxxxx> >>> To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 11:18 PM >>> Subject: [jhb] Re: UK Farmstrips >>> >>> >>>> Without photo scenery VFR navigation is limited to coastlines or other >>>> prominent features. >>>> >>>> The VFR England and Wales scenery made VFR navigation possible in FS98 >>>> but >>>> it was slightly too easy. Our towns and motorways stood out quite >>>> clearly >>>> from the default landclass so anyone with a reasonable idea of >>>> geography >>>> could get around quite well. Once Mally brought out the photo scenery >>>> the >>>> full complexity of ground features was there to see and map reading >>>> became >>>> as difficult in FS as in real life. >>>> >>>> Map reading is a tricky skill to learn and I suspect many FS pilots >>>> don't >>>> fully embrace it. I'm sure many have the navaids or GPS on in the >>>> background >>>> and take a quick peek from time to time as a cross check. The downside >>>> to >>>> this is that although comforting to do at the time it stops you >>>> building >>>> confidence in your VFR skills. >>>> >>>> One of the bad things about FS is that it leads users up the garden >>>> path. >>>> It >>>> gives you the impression that all aircraft are fitted with full ADF, >>>> VOR, >>>> ILS, DME and GPS nav kit and most have autopilots. If only. The Cessna >>>> aircraft I learned on had nothing but a radio and an aircraft fitted >>>> with >>>> an >>>> ADF was a luxury - and early ADF's were tuneable too so you had to be >>>> VERY >>>> careful to tune in to the right beacon. >>>> >>>> My longest pure VFR flights were from Hawarden to White Waltham in a >>>> Chipmunk without any navaids and from Shannon to Ronaldsway in a PA28 >>>> that >>>> had a VOR but it had failed the day before when landing at Kerry. In >>>> both >>>> cases it was back to pure map reading for the flights - and in both >>>> cases >>>> I >>>> didn't fly a direct line between the two airfields but plotted a course >>>> to >>>> pick up easily identifiable ground features. This is how.. >>>> >>>> On departure from Chester I headed south to Wrexham then past Chirk and >>>> Rednal. At Rednal pick up the railway line to Shrewsbury and then >>>> continue >>>> SE to pick up the Severn at Bridgenorth. Follow the Severn all the way >>>> down >>>> to Worcester (dead easy that bit). At Worcester pick up the railway >>>> line >>>> that runs east through Evesham and curves south through Moreton in the >>>> Marsh >>>> and Oxford. At Oxford pickup the M40 and once you cross the ridge of >>>> the >>>> Chilterns turn south to Henley. Don't beat up the boats. At Henley turn >>>> east >>>> and White Waltham is 3nm ahead. >>>> >>>> With no Ireland photo scenery the Shannon trip isn't worth going into >>>> detail >>>> but I did much the same thing and followed the Shannon river all the >>>> way >>>> to >>>> Athlone and then turned right to Mullingar and Dublin. >>>> >>>> On a nice day VFR flying is a delight. If the cloud is low or >>>> visibility >>>> is >>>> poor it can be one of the toughest tasks in aviation - and that's the >>>> rub. >>>> VFR pilots have a weather sense that must be a close second to any >>>> sailor >>>> as >>>> both may have their lives resting on their interpretation of the charts >>>> or >>>> what they see ahead. VFR and weather go hand in hand and your skills in >>>> knowing the latter develop your abilities with the former. >>>> >>>> This very essential pairing is missing from FS because you don't get >>>> any >>>> impression how frightening weather is. Everyone in FS flies into cloud >>>> as >>>> if >>>> it's no big deal - and it isn't because all aircraft fly perfectly, >>>> have >>>> no >>>> tendency to roll or yaw, all have autopilot and totally reliable >>>> instruments. It's so easy that you cannot even begin to perceive how >>>> different it is in real life. Two things here - only skilled pilots go >>>> into >>>> cloud and they also realise that once in cloud any VFR navigation is >>>> impossible and can revert to IFR skills. Most basic PPL's don't have >>>> these >>>> skills unless they've done the IMC Rating or I/R courses. >>>> >>>> A little test for you all. Next time you see some cloud ahead in FS >>>> turn >>>> the >>>> autopilot off and see how hard it is to maintain height and heading. If >>>> you >>>> find it hard remember that most GA pilots have to do the same - except >>>> the >>>> lucky few with wing levellers. >>>> >>>> As a real skill test repeat the above but go into your FS settings and >>>> fail >>>> the artificial horizon. The last is not an exercise in skill but to see >>>> how >>>> long you last before you lose control. This last exercise is to show >>>> you >>>> what happens when an untrained pilot accidentally flies into cloud and, >>>> for >>>> those that luckily survive this experience, why they stay well away >>>> from >>>> it. >>>> Only basic instrument skills are taught in the PPL and so such pilots >>>> live >>>> in a permanent VFR world and shun cloud and bad visibility. Instrument >>>> skills are part of advanced training but only a fraction of all PPL's >>>> go >>>> down this route. >>>> >>>> bones >>>> bones@xxxxxxx >>>> http://woodair.net >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jhb-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On >>>> Behalf >>>> Of Frank Turley >>>> Sent: 31 July 2008 21:01 >>>> To: jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>>> Subject: [jhb] Re: UK Farmstrips >>>> >>>> Paul, >>>> >>>> I'm sure that's true, the photo-scenery allows us to navigate to the >>>> strips >>>> using the charts or a good road atlas. How they manage VFR in the areas >>>> without photoscenery I don't know. >>>> >>>> I guess that's why IVAO is dominated by big tin. >>>> >>>> Frank T. >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Paul Reynolds" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 7:05 PM >>>> Subject: [jhb] Re: UK Farmstrips >>>> >>>> >>>>> Having installed the FSX strips onto a non Gen-X system, they are >>>>> unusable. The agn, because they are tied to Gen-X bgl files do not >>>>> show. >>>>> Instead I get the default autogen which sees trees and buildings in >>>>> places >>>> >>>>> they just ought not to be. >>>>> >>>>> As an experiment, I used ADE to create an autogen exclude polygon for >>>>> Alcester along and just beyond the runway but without the visual >>>>> references provided by the Gen-X scenery (eg. the A435, the town and >>>>> the >>>>> river) the field is impossible to find. >>>>> >>>>> My conclusion is that while the files could be made default FSX SP2 >>>>> compatible, without using an unreasonably large exclude file to make >>>>> the >>>>> field more visible and with no supporting visual referencing to find >>>>> the >>>>> strips I'm not sure it's worth doing. I say this not because it's not >>>>> feasible but because the whole point of using the farm strips is as an >>>>> exercise in VFR. As the default SP2 FSX does not sufficiently support >>>>> the >>>> >>>>> other elements needed for reasonable quality VFR in the UK they just >>>>> become landing strips with the actual navigation and visual >>>>> referencing >>>>> enroute missing. >>>>> >>>>> Paul >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> From: "Gerry Winskill" <gwinsk@xxxxxxx> >>>>> To: <jhb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 5:21 PM >>>>> Subject: [jhb] Re: UK Farmstrips >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Frank, >>>>>> >>>>>> Branscome was in my list to do, for the batch I've just released. The >>>>>> problem is that the better visibillity in the Horizon scenery, and >>>>>> Google >>>> >>>>>> Earth, shows I'd need to re do the whole thing. The runway is longer >>>>>> than >>>> >>>>>> could be seen in FS9. It also goes downhill and because of that, from >>>>>> the >>>> >>>>>> angle the shots are taken, appears to be curved. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll put it in the next batch though. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've got several lists of the ones I've done; out of necessity. A >>>>>> number >>>>>> in excess of 100 is etched on my brain. Rather like the scars that I >>>>>> assume adorn the F1 chief! Less fun though. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gerry Winskill >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Frank Turley wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Gerry, >>>>>>> I've just done an inventory on my system, I have - >>>>>>> Farms FS9 Plus - 14 fields >>>>>>> Farms FSX - 21 fields >>>>>>> UK Farmstrips - 48 fields >>>>>>> Old ones from FS9 - 7 fields >>>>>>> Total 90 fields >>>>>>> The old ones are Alder Hall, Ashleys Field, Branscombe, Garston >>>>>>> Farm, >>>>>>> Manor Farm Collingbourne and another Manor Farm. >>>>>>> I have a spreadsheet listing them in Excel 2007, if you'd like a >>>>>>> copy >>>>>>> or a csv version. >>>>>>> Incidentally, I recall you asking for requests for the next ones, I >>>>>>> think the place where we had the fly-in would be good - Gunton >>>>>>> Park - >>>>>>> but we may need to wait for FS11 before you are able to animate the >>>>>>> deer >>>> >>>>>>> off the runway! >>>>>>> Frank T. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >>>> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.12/1592 - Release Date: >>>> 8/5/2008 >>>> 6:03 AM >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> No virus found in this incoming message. >>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >>> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.5.12/1596 - Release Date: >>> 8/6/2008 >>> 4:55 PM >>> >>> >> >> >> >> >> No virus found in this incoming message. >> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.0/1602 - Release Date: 8/9/2008 >> 1:22 PM >> >> >> > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.3/1611 - Release Date: 8/14/2008 > 6:20 AM > > >