Catalina to San Luis Co Regional

Lockheed P-38M-6-L O Lightning

• RE: Catalina - San Luis, Feb 29 Multiplayer?,andor, 01:38z, 02-23-04
  • RE: Catalina - San Luis, Feb 29 Multiplayer?,RobertVA, 20:01z, 02-23-04
    • RE: Catalina - San Luis, Feb 29 Mul...,Ben_Chiu, 01:51z, 02-24-04
      • RE: Catalina - San Luis, Feb 29 Mul...,andor, 01:13z, 02-27-04
• RE: Catalina - San Luis, Feb 29 Multiplayer?,PL965Melo, 03:10z, 02-28-04

G,day Robert, guys,
Sounds good to me Robert.
Do you mind if I use this (your) post to throw a couple of ideas into the melting pot. ?
1. As much as we all love the P.38, a suggestion to use one of the default aircraft (which we would all have)like the Beechcraft Baron or (horrors) the Lear. I noticed in the KTVL-KSBP flight the 737 and Lear had to be used.
Shorten the flight and use the Piper cub with a developing 200* 25 knot breeze at KSBP... Now THAT would be fun
2. Order of take off to be posted in the forum before the flight. Would just love to ride shotgun on tb
Looking forward to KAVX & thx Robert.
Regards,
Andy

I've been thinking it would be nice to have some flights with a different model myself. Most of the propeller driven alternatives would need a shorter route to keep the flight time near or under an hour though. Maybe we could plan for a DC-3 or Ford Trimotor flight with the Beech Baron or Kingair as an alternate for FS 2002 pilots. We could fly to or from airports like Santa Barbara, Lompoc, Vandenburg or Bakersfield. Maybe we could even include fields as far as Ventura or Monterey.

I'll look in the documentation for the seaplane port listing, but we may have to use unlisted "Bush Flying" bodies of water to have a floatplane flight within the Central California Coast area. We could do a round trip betwen an airport and a "Bush Flying" lake or harbor.

For the single engine fans, we could have flights from the closer fields like Paso Robles, Oceano and maybe Santa Maria Hancock. From those fields we could fly aircraft like the smaller Cessnas, the Piper and the WW I vintage planes.

I've noticed many of the planes don't stop very well if they have more than about 30% or 40% of their fuel capacity aboard. I've been reducing the fuel load of my plane at the begining of the flights. Could takeoff weight account for the speed and climb performace differences we have been experiencing? Do we have enough people that can handle the Learjet or 737 well enough to have a flight from someplace like Las Vegas?

I think the multiplayer room is set up to generate random weather conditions and feed them to us with changes on the half hour. Ben can provide more information on that and if it would be feasable to manualy set weather for a scheduled flight. That Piper is a bit of a chalenge to taxi under calmer conditions, unless the tail wheel specifications are edited. I'm not sure how many of us could safely reach the parking appron in a 25 kt wind.

I'll let others comment on the takeoff order suggestion. Maybe we could orbit the takeoff field for a few minutes and gather a bit closer together in the air. It's hard to keep closer than about half a mile spacing in flight with the lag time making other peoples planes apear to shift around in a random manner though. It sometimes looks like the simulator displays positions in the order they are received instead of ignoreing updates generated before the last position displayed. I've been backing off the throttle a bit during the flights to try keeping close to the middle of the group, and keep within what appears to be a ten mile range for the multiplayer aircraft tags. Unfortunately the lead plane is sometimes more than 20 miles ahead of the trailing plane though.

As usual, the routes are suggestions and we can wait until late in the week to decide where we're going to fly.

Robert

Near KORF

> I've been thinking it would be nice to have some flights with a
> different model myself. Most of the propeller driven alternatives would
> need a shorter route to keep the flight time near or under an hour
> though.

Another alternative would be to take longer flights, but do them in short hops. I suppose what really matters is what folks want to gain from these flights. If one is looking to learn to make flight plans, there's something to be said for flying to familiar airports when you're first starting out (and you don't need to get new charts all of the time either--an advantage). Of course flying to unfamiliar destinations is helpful once you get the basics down.

> Could takeoff
> weight account for the speed and climb performace differences we have
> been experiencing?

It's possible, but I think the main problem we've been having is low power from the lack of leaning mixtures at high altitudes.

> I think the multiplayer room is set up to generate random weather
> conditions and feed them to us with changes on the half hour. Ben can
> provide more information on that and if it would be feasable to manualy
> set weather for a scheduled flight.

We can change the weather at will.
Just FYI, weather is generated based on weather systems. What we've got running is pretty mild. We can bump it up a notch of two if any one is game, but I'm afraid that'll leave the VFR guys grounded.

Ben

-= VPC OffLine Reader 2.1 =-
Registered to: Ben Chiu
-OLR.PL v1.83-

G,day guys,
Your amphibian flight sounds a good idea also Robert, just had a look at Catalina,s Pebbly Beach (L11) and found the Baron doesn,t float too well!! . Lack of pre-flight planning .
There would appear to be many a lake around KSBP which we could plan flights to.
What I have noticed (maybe fuel load connected) is that on cruise climb out I have no trouble keeping up with,say, Vic in the P38,s, but once in level flight he draws away, I generally take off with only 50% fuel, so leaning of the mixture would appear to be important to adjust speeds.
The short stage flights over a long distance also sounds very interesting Ben, maybe taking turns in each stage plan.
I personally find the flight planning 50% of the fun in flying, both real and in FS9, each situation teaching the other and learning from both. The latitude we have in RW is just an added bonus
See you all soon,
Andy.

Hi Robert, Ben, and all,

>This route has a nice low altitude pass over Los Angeles
>International Airport. The Lightning seems to be limited
>to a bit lower speed at a mere 10,500 ft, but the
>landscape is a bit more interesting viewed from the lower
>altitude.
>

I was really looking forward to this flight, especially because it
was from Catalina. Unfortunately I have to be at a Fire Department Awards
Dinner this Saturday evening with my wife Lenia. She works at the local
fire department.

>Date is for 0300z of course. Would be Feb. 28 at 1900 for
>Pacific coast of US/Canada. Would be later on Feb 29 for
>Australia.

Hope you all have a good flight and a great time. Respectfully
requesting a rain check until next time.

Best regards,
Melo
PL965 Spitfire pilot,
Glendale, CA