Wednesday evening session discussion thread.

[Woosh]

Hello,

If you ask me,
I do understand your matter about the yellow / blue glider.
It should never appears in normal use.

FYI, The DHC2 :
- is in the FG base repo;
- give me fun (nicely flyable / jsbsim / completed / "have something");
- graphically consume 1/10 of any other plane in your list.

If there is 1 good reason (I would be missing to see) to not fly it time to time, please feel free to enlighten me.
As for me, I can see all and any of your ACFTs with no problems.

Woosh

[MariuszXC]

Hello Woosh,

I don't think it is a major issue, just a small nuisance to some of us who want to document our group events and flights, to keep good memories longer
Many (most?) of us do not keep a full local copy of the default hangar for various reasons, and those will see a default glider in place of any locally unknown model.
Niels is trying to compile a list of usual planes just for this reason, at least this is my understanding.

[Ysop]

Yes, exactly that. list of aircraft in use by us not to spoil screenshots, also to help newcomers with joining us.So it should not be too long.
A list of aircraft recommendations would be structured differently. We'll see, how it evolves.

Has anybody have something in hand for this Wednesday?

[Volador]

I have a tour in mind unless there are contributions from participants who have not contributed for a while?

[Woosh]

Hello,

@ for the record ( and the "posterity" :roflol: ) :

- blue glider: not welcome, understood, seconded.
- download the whole hangar(s): not wanted, understood, seconded.
- Niels trying to compile a list of usual favourite ACFT: welcome, understood, seconded.

and to me, so it was, from the beginning!

Actually from before, I was doing group/event flights already > 10 y ago and we, every single time, came to face the very same issue.

May we RIP this matter, please ?
Thank you in advance.

Any what,
the question put was about the DHC2 and not about some whole hangar, is it not, Marius?

If there is 1 good reason (I would be missing to see) to not fly it time to time, please feel free to enlighten me.

and ruling out 1 plane using the whole hangar argument is not the nicer thing to do.
In English there an expression like (I do not remember exactly) : "kill the Bill" or "kill the Jack" something like that, where one, in order to obtain success in an debate, use a side argument, not related with the first, but which already have a known answer that he use as a wrench.
Sorry I can not remember the proper expression...

The question put was not about the whole hangar but about the DHC2 only.

Don't you thing guys this is about fairness ?

from your list :

- ASK21
- C172p
- C182s
- C208
- DHC-6-300
- Diamond DA40NG
- Piper J3
- Piper PA28-161
- Pilatus PC-9M

I had to download extra and install planes I did not had ( not usual to me)

- C182s
- C208
- Diamond DA40NG
- Piper J3
- Piper PA28-161
- Pilatus PC-9M

what is 66%
and we have all this parliament for you to install 1 plane ?

Said it, it is about fairness.

Woosh

[Woosh]

Hello

Bonn - Insbrueck Kranebite

There is a passage in between the Alps that allow to reach Insbrueck VFR by the Valleys.

Short flight, sightseeing, lovely scenarios, somewhat challenging.

Interested ?
I can do a skyvector map.

Woosh

[wkitty42]

It is a pitty, that FG "Next" shows the standard C172P from the stable version as a glider...

initial eWAG: that would seem to indicate that the proper versioned FGData for your NEXT is not in place where FG can find it...

[Woosh]

Correction
EDDM Muenich / Lowi Insbrueck

[Woosh]

Hello

https://skyvector.com/?ll=47.8098343628 ... 39E%20LOWI

Woosh

[Ysop]

Woosh,
kindly check on your side, why your emotions run in full blaze on this.

I just haven't said anything on the DH2. Just neutral nothing. Not negative, not positive. No update of the list, no statement.
There are reasons.

The list is intended to show the aircraft we use generally and have been used in the past often. It is not about collecting suggestions. A bit of a fine difference, but a difference. Maybe my wording was not clear enough.
You have suggested an aircraft rarely used in the past and I wanted to see how it resonate within the group.

In public I avoid to comment on other peoples FDMs. In the case clp,cnr, cmq are not realistic. 3 reasons.

Both points were intended to be thrown into the mumble chat, as it would have been much easier in an audio discussion.

We have no involvement into past discussions about the yellow glider.
There was no intention to make a fight over this list.

[Volador]

Hello

https://skyvector.com/?ll=47.8098343628 ... 39E%20LOWI

Woosh

@Whoosh, you have made lots of excellent contributions recently, I'm not sure a rota is appropriate (any thoughts everyone?) but I wonder if we would all welcome a wider input? I appreciate we all have other priorities but a Skyvector route and/or an Event Thread forum post can be done in 10-15 minutes.
For me, I find the Wednesday Evening events much more fun when someone has taken a little time to plan for the group.
I'm also happy to go with your route

[Woosh]

So than I

about the "little time to plan for the group"
this rota have been the result of a research "on the field (flying in FG)", a few years ago, with several ACFTs, in order to check the do-ability for several users, and took me 2 or 3 days.

Of course, laying it down here on a skyvector map did not take again 2 or 3 days ...

Help me, what did I miss ?

Woosh

[Woosh]

you know, one of my difficulties is :

when one say 1 thing, my autistic (type 3 / Aspi ) mind with LLI understand 10 more valid hypothesis.

Sometime, more accuracy in the originating expression may help but this is always have been a funny roller coast.

Soooorry to be different from most of the people and from most of the "normal".

but, I am, proudly, somewhere in the middle here :

( and not on the top or bottom right ... honi soit qui mal y pense)

I am not the only one nor in the World neither in FG.

I hope you al accept me as I am,
do not ask me to be "a certain way" just to be accepted
and, above all, laugh with me at my differences.

Woosh

[Volador]

My suggestion for a route was this one but we can keep it in the bag until next week:
https://skyvector.com/?ll=44.8157428488 ... 46E%20LFLG

<div id="sv_6255" style="width: 200px; height: 200px;">Make your <a href="https://skyvector.com/">Flight Plan</a> at SkyVector.com</div><script src="//skyvector.com/api/lchart?ll=44.81574284884946,5.837922435228925&amp;s=5&amp;c=sv_6255&amp;i=301" type="text/javascript"></script>

[Ysop]

No worries, dear Woosh!
Sometimes it is learning on all sides and we certainly manage to put away the drama, as here there is definitely no reason to have such here.
Apart from some special features of individuals we could also note, that communication via text in a public forum can easily go wrong, especially as non native speakers like me might not get nuances. And at times things can just get wrong.

I haven't been in Innsbruck for a while, so I am in for this.

We could set up something like Alps west to east, like LFMN to LOWG, consisting of 8 legs or so. Not only would Chris' suggestion make a great leg 2 for this, we could also always come back to the next leg, if someone is not coming up with something special.
But for sure a decent flight planning takes more than just a skyvector route, but for sure it would do like this for our purposes.