San Fransisco to (near) Clifden Ireland. 747, no navaids, almost no scenery.

1st Official Post

    This is a 747 repeat of a cross Atlantic flight described in the third post in Donkas's 6th April thread Time-Lapse-Global-Flight
    http://www.ipacs.de/forum/showthre…al-Flight-model
    The navigation method and route is unchanged. I could not use the detailed plotted rhumb line live for fear of loosing the Aerofly flight through switching apps live.


    San Francisco to Galway, near Clifden where the first non stop Atlantic flight landed in 1919. Leaving the North American west coast for the European west coast, Rhumb Line true heading 078 with an average estimated variation of 8 East as far as the start of the great lakes to give a magnetic heading to steer of 070 M.


    Passing Yosemite and Mono lake, with average variation in use the track will vary due to higher or lower local variation, the local Hdg M to pass exactly north of Mono would have been 078 T minus 14 East to steer 068 M.

    By Utah the scenery is gone. Maximum stable performance established after some creep up and zoom down to get Mach 0.954. Horizon at 33,000 feet is 213 miles away. A fuel burn 'how goes it' gives zero fuel used, less than expected.


    Bland sandy scenery but is this a FAULT?


    Moon setting, a chance for some bubble ***tant shots in the open cockpit Pitts or an old aircraft which has an astrodome. Maybe in the full sized version with independent add-ons. Would a Radio Range navigation (.- versus -. in the earphones) add-on in the full size version in a 40s or 50s airliner not be wonderful?
    Hey IPACS what about it now in mobile? No need for any of those moving dials. Radio Range worked so well because only a cheap ordinary radio was needed.
    Edit read (space added) se xtant shots



    Looking for the Great Lakes.


    Oshkosh!


    Milwaukee

    New average magnetic variation applied at the Great Lakes for as far as St Johns. 078 T plus 12 West for 090 M.


    Saginaw, 'm m m m m ........all come to look for America'. Simon & Garfunkel


    Various NDBs pop up but they all have the same 417 frequency so having the numbers on view does not help much. A single ILS appeared but with 3 mile wake-ups that would be expected.


    Barrie and Toronto, about 20 miles north of intended track after 2000 miles with no nav aids or ground detail. About 1/2 a degree out. Got worse later.


    Montreal

    NDB passing 2miles to starboard about 80 miles past Montreal must have been Victoriaville. Note the ident F8 .._. _ _ _..
    Edit Only worked that out later, not live. Was afraid to look up charts in case swopping live apps killed the flight.


    The Atlantic Ocean.


    The planned track was south of the Iles de la Madeline in the Gulf of St Lawrence so I was about 60 miles out after another 1000 miles or 4 degrees! Must have underestimated the big variation bubble on the east coast.
    Edit 1 degree out from SFO.


    Correcting more to coast-out at St Johns Newfoundland.


    St Johns. Last land for 1,600 very nautical miles. Full local variation of plus 18 west plus 2 of correction for 098 M.


    Turning for 091 M, 078 T plus average Atlantic Ocean variation of 12 west plus 1 correction. Should have delayed the turn a bit.


    Nice weather for the middle of the North Atlantic. Not much of a view.

    Continued

    Edited 3 times, last by Overloaded (April 12, 2015 at 6:29 AM).

    Sounds like a good flight! Do you have any pics of the scenery (or lack of) at Galway. I didn't know that there were any working NDBs or ILSs outside of the SFO region. Why don't you fly to Zurich, at once overhead, switch to AF1 and complete the flight surrounded by the stunning Swiss scenery. You would have no rnav though.

    Gary

    Continued


    Turning for local variation near Ireland. 078 T plus 6 west for 084 M. Got it wrong.


    Coasting-in about 60 miles too far north again but about 6 in 180 or 2 degrees out after 3 hours of blind flying. I had hoped for a ridiculous 10 mile error.
    Edit 0.75 degrees out from SFO.


    The course was from the marine NDB "Eagle Island Lt H" (which was not indicated on the panel expanded HSI, they work OK in planes in real life) to the Carnmore NDB at Galway airport which should have been on 321.


    Leaving the coast with Galway Bay coming out of the murk on the horizon.


    NDB from a nearby airport.


    Carnmore NDB alive with the airport ahead somewhere.



    Passing Galway for the airport, not much detail. Google earth for comparison.


    Out of date NDB chart. I hope Jeppesen don't mind. Not really a 747 field.


    Beacon outbound. An ILS came alive to my surprise.


    3 mile finals with Google Earth comparison. I landed but at the very end at low speed I over ruddered trying to keep on the invisible runway using the localiser and must have wobbled the 747 and it crashed before I came to a stop! No ILS approach guides appeared in the sky with the live ILS.

    Edited once, last by Overloaded (April 12, 2015 at 6:22 AM).

    Hi Gary,
    what about going to Zurich in Aerofly 2 and try to NDB hop on the way using time/distance flown vs angular change to determine how far out they are to positively id the beacons. Once lined up on a Zurich ILS turn down the vis and set the time to UTC minus 1 hour for a zero visibility local midnight cat III autopilot approach? Reduce the descent rate and set a lower speed (simulates throttle cut) on the autopilot at 100 feet above the missing approach lights.

    See my comment about the setting Moon? The forum software censored the (space added) se xtant word! We don't want that here, down with that sort of thing!

    Quote from Overloaded

    See my comment about the setting Moon? The forum software censored the (space added) se xtant word! We don't want that here, down with that sort of thing!

    Lol!

    That must have been a very difficult flight; no scenery to tell where you are by! Did you do a lot of it using all the navigation features in the plane (I dont know all the names of them). There is no way I would have been able to do that - I don't know how to use the proper navigation built into the planes, I can just use the aerofly navigation but I am trying to learn how to do all that.
    Very impressive!

    Tristan

    Tristan, there is a wealth of knowledge on here with ref to radio nav and navaids. Aerofly 2 is a good tool for learning the basics on how navigate using the the aircraft's on board navigational system and there are some great tutorial videos on YouTube. If you need help then just ask and I am sure that someone on here will answer.

    Good luck!

    Overloaded, I would try that but I don't think I could spare the time! I am impressed that you received NDB signals that far from California. It is obvious that ipacs put time into the creating a sim that is ready for the future and additional areas. I hope that the VORs are also mapped and working. How many times did you adjust for changes in magnetic variation?

    Hi Tristan, the navaids were used for the last thirty miles but all the rest was just flight planned in advance as described in the earlier post mentioned. The biggest point is to plan using a true track and then convert to magnetic in local steps as flying a simple compass based heading in a plane will actually be pointing you in different true, real, actual directions in different regions.
    Some incredibly advanced navigation techniques are taught but they are only suited to something like a Lockeed Constellation doing 200 knots with a dedicated navigator crew member with a plotting table and plenty of time. Taught, examined, passed and then forgotten.
    Hi Gary, just 3,
    departure 070 hdg M until reaching the great lakes,
    090 (I rounded down + 12.25 to + 12 which didn't help. I estimated the first half of that sector as 8 W and the second as 16.5 W, average 12.25 W) until St Johns and
    091 across the Atlantic, an inadequate + 1 degree having been added.
    I did a too short 100 miles of 098 after St Johns and meant to set 084 for the last 100 miles before Ireland. It was hurried and it did not really work going to St Johns, needing a massive correction across Newfoundland but if I was doing it properly I would plot the great circle and measure the track and variation for each divided course interval.
    Its funny I converted the SkyVector great circle to a rhumb line and it didn't agree with the Rhumb Line sites value. I assumed my conversion was wrong and dumped it, must have another look.

    1 degree of error at 3,300 nm, approx St John rhumb line distance, is 55 nm so crude estimations of average magnetic variance could account for that 60 nm in the Gulf of St Lawrence.

    Edit, the wide variation contours at the North American east coast meant that more of the great lakes to St Johns sector had a high magnetic variation and I had underestimated the average variation. Going from 20 miles north to 60 north of the intended track meant an error of 2.5 degrees. The same wide contours at the start of the atlantic leg had a similar effect. Correcting a nav error should (!) involve an alteration to stop the drift off course and a second correction to get back onto the intended track.

    Edited 3 times, last by Overloaded (April 13, 2015 at 9:39 PM).

    Yes, largly geological, not nit picking about dull scenery that is fairly amorphic. (Later) I see what you mean, no elevations, a bit like the end of the world before Adak47's Alp D'Huez (Aerofly FS challenge) photo location (at least in mobile, it might have gone on further in full size FS). I suppose before Denver should have been a bit bumpy. Shades of 'Dumb and Dumber'. No real Rockie mountain but I was high.

    Very interesting thread folks. Its nice to see people try to explore the limits of our simulator.

    We hope to improve the navigation features in one of the next updates, so its easier for you to perform these things.

    Again, this does not really make much sense yet as we haven't modelled any airports yet outside of California.

    We are also working on new compressions techniques to get the App size smaller, you will probably see that in one of the next updates.

    With this extra space we can either add more details around California or add more global features like world wide height data or improved world wide aerial images.

    We would like to hear from you: What would be more important for you? More area around California, possibly the neighboring states or more global stuff, possibly with less detail between those areas?

    I really enjoy flying around California and the detail included. I would be grateful for more regions though. If they can be linked together in some way then great but even if they were separate, autonomous entities on their own, I would still be happy.
    Regarding improving the global data or imagery, it would be great if this was optional so people have the choice and there is less emphasis the need to improve compression, even though that would be welcome by all I'm sure.

    For me the current level of detail in perfectly adequate. I tend to fly around the ares of farmland to the north of the map between sacremento and Byron as I the scenery in this area seems more detailed than in the south. So I would opt for more detail globally.

    Overloaded, I flew the b737 from Montery to Sacramento last night bouncing from NDB to NDB, as per your old post listing the NDBs,and then flew what has become my standard IFR circuit on AF2. I fly to the beacon on the centreline and track away toward the airfield remaining at 5000'+. i intercept the localiser at 3 miles out and continue towards the airport until I pass overhead (marked by the localiser needle swinging out). I then turn 200deg which mean I will intercept the localiser at 20deg. It then fly the reciprocal of the runway heading, maintaining the localiser and using the clock on the instrument panel to time my downwind leg to approx 12 miles. I also descend to 3000'. At approx 12 miles, I conduct another 200deg turn and intercept the localsier for the third and final time. The glideslope is then intercepted and the approach is flown.

    The 737 is great for this kind of flying alhtough a lack of displayed ADF freq sometimes makes it challenging to know which NDB you are looking at without resorting to the map. I really hope the 737 is updated to show ADF freqs, DME and Nav 2. If it is then is will become the aircraft of choice for those wanting to fly commercial routes using 'proper navigation' and without an FMC.

    Ipacs, have you considered creating small HD scenery packs centred on a major airport? This would mean that we could conduct long haul,or even short haul flights and have detailed scenery for the takeoff and landing phases and pass over low definite scenery during the cruise when we are too bothered by scenery. also when cruising at FL300+, even low definition scenery can appear adequate. If you manage to free up some space then why not create a scenery pack for either Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland, Vancouver or Pheonix which only extends for 25nm around the airport? this would allow us to conduct flights of a reasonable distance (500-1000nm).

    I really like Gary's idea of having more detail in major airports for take-off and landing! You could have it built into the navigation system, so the start and destination airports have more detail. Hopefully this would be optional as some users might not have the space to store the higher res textures.

    Regarding IPACS question on what we would rather see in upcoming updates, the most important thing for me would be hight data across the global map, and improved global textures. More areas around California could be an optional download for people with higher storage devices because I presonally prefer to fly in mountainous regions and am not so bothered about the flatter California area as I'm sure do some other people.
    Tristan

    I also like Gary's idea. I had thought of a long run like Zurich via Basel or Bern type NDB equiped fields to NDB hop but it would be hollow to have Zurich at sea level. A coarse mesh stretching as far as stamina makes sense with a corresponding coarse imagery could be a background sea for detailed islands of nominated mini FSs which could be hubs for the longer flights. The busiest passenger routes could be a starting web biased towards the pretty or the navagitionally significant. The far east could feature Bangkok, Singapore, Melbourne and Sydney and to the north Hong Kong, Shanghai and some Japanese cities. The west could bridge from Narsarsuaq through Gander, Boston, New York to Washington DC. Europe can fight over things! IPACS can just do Europe, we don't need EU type consensus or it will never happen.
    If working navaids are delayed significantly then giving a number of core NDBs their correct frequencies would be a good short term improvement.

    Edited once, last by Overloaded: Spelling (April 13, 2015 at 9:11 PM).

    I like analogy of a web with series of smaller HD nodes (like orbx airport packs for FSX). I still think there is a requirement for a number of larger scenery packs with high quality scenery for those wishing to fly a spam can VFR and look out the window as they do. For that reason I think the larger sceneries such as Norcal and Switzerland should focus more on the smaller airports and grass strips and stunning scenery.

    If the smaller nodes were to be fully supported with navaids and had a good level of detail then I sure people would be happy to part with cash for the 'nodes' they want and have enough memory space for. This would be a good source of income for the devs where as just increasing an already established area or simply adding more detail or airports probably wouldn't.

    Good point Gary,
    After the Achievement Awards I had a very faint, not serious fantasy of chainsawing the wings off the IPACS corporate Gulfstream but in the real world I want them to do really well. Paying for quality scenery would be natural and as reasonable as paying for a new aeroplane for us to debug.
    I gave money to Infinite Flight and Xplanes 9 and especially in Xplanes I never felt happy with what I got. The core approach to Innsbruk from the east is just rotten, doing a hold over RTT teleports the plane to the opposite side of the scenery. Not wanting to praise Xplane (!) on the Aerofly forum but my point is that people will pay for scenery even if they do not expect all that much.
    Would it be reasonable to get scenery and navaids that work in an in-app purchase?

    Edited once, last by Overloaded: Spelling (April 13, 2015 at 11:16 AM).

    • Official Post

    Hello,

    I also like Gary's idea! Currently there is not enough room to fly the a320 and b737 or even the b747 in the current region realistically. Therefore I would like to see destinations like LAX, JFK, Seattle, Chicago, etc...

    For the desktop version I would love to see the major airports of each country for example these ones:
    London Heathrow & Gatwick, Paris, Toulouse, Lisboa, Madrid, Palma de Mallorca, Rome, Milano, Innsbruck, Vienna, Prague, Munich, Frankfurt, Hamburg, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Athens, Istanbul

    For the desktop versions it will be much easier to create scenery by free developers of course. We could import airports and terrain mesh from other simulators.

    Regards,
    Jan