Official GAAR 2017 Forum

My Congratulations to the model builder and film crew , great work!

Simon,

The middle airfield "Cessnock" is a full stop landing.
The first leg, Port Macquarie to Cessnock, set your sim to the departure information at Port Macquarie and fly to Cessnock.
Record your time in the usual way, brakes release to full stop on the runway, write the time down on a piece of paper or whatever, do not submit it.

Reset your sim for the second leg to the departure information from Cessnock and fly to Camden, record your time for that leg then add the two times together and submit the total.

Example....Port Macquarie to Cessnock.........35 minutes
Cessnock to Camden....................40 minutes
Total...............................................75 minutes
Submit the total only 75 minutes for leg 4 on your Pirep.

Hope that explains it.

Rob

No problem

There is a touch and go in leg 9, this is also linked to an ILS approach for those that wish to do so, the ILS is not compulsory.

Rob

Apologies for not posting an update of the roster for those who have completed the first leg so far. Work has taken me down South again, and I won't be back before the weekend when I will be able to catch up.

Cheers,
Allan

Urs,
It is still a beta version...
I do like the bird improvements, except on performance side, where I find it slower and less powerful than v3.12b. I understand the developpers did calculate their speed mathematics on basis of 140 kts KTAS cruise speed.

I did a flight yesterday in Germany (real date but clear weather), departing with only 100 USG per main tank, and finally ended climbing at 12800ft (final climb rate 200ft/min.!), altitude at which my 30" MAP started to decrease. Useless to say that in these conditions, you should avoid to fly the Hump...

But you can gain power by changing the power_scalar value, let us say to 1.0 or 1.1, to get a fair 140 kts KIAS when cruising around 6000/7000ft, and to be able to climb to some 15000/16000ft at least.
An other interesting value to play with is the fuel_flow_scalar, as I understand the real life C-47/DC-3 burns more or less 45 USG per hour and per engine when cruising at 2050 RPM and 30" MAP...

Still a lot of possible tweaks to investigate, in other words...

Philippe

I mean, why the hell the devellopers change flight performance into a downgrade instead of improvement although the vc lighting is great! I will change the cfg settings from the older version to the new one,...... as Urs mentioned, this is not a standard procedure and needs some skills what you cannot await from a random FSX user,.... to bad that the new beta version needs so much more attention, and another proposal: install the sperry autopilot instead of innecessary window variations,..... so you see, a neverending story😉

Well...

I am not a techie on the subject, but just trying to understand from time to time, which conducted me to numerous re-format, re-install, re-configure, etc... I have been putting my hands in grease and dust since my Win 3.0 times for my PC, and since FS9 for flight-simming, and as the time was passing, became more and more prudent about my "test and try" virus. The few I know just comes from the experiments I made, and from my system rebuilds when my interventions were too risky.
If I am not confusing, the ..._scalar tricks are something I have been using since a couple of years, to ease engine manual starts on some aircrafts.
Anyway, no trouble at my side, the only important thing is flying the way each simpilot likes to fly with the equipment and addons available to him.
However, being also flying on line with other pilots on board same aircraft, I must keep a "standardized" aircraft for multiplayer flights, and keep fiddling with aircrafts on a local basis and so far just for my own pleasure (until I reach interesting results).

Blue skies to all of you, mates

Philippe