|
Post by Defender on Oct 18, 2019 10:45:35 GMT -5
Glad it helps. Also I don't think there's a breadcrumb trail option but although you can't create a new fix other than clicking on the map, once you have a fix you can then drag it to where you think the aircraft is by your navigation, and it will always show the new coordinates in the tooltip as you drag it. That way you get a record of your actual track. So you create flight plan A for your planned track then switch to a new flight plan B to record progress. Does that make sense?
If some of the RR positions seem miles from the real locations then it might be due to the way they were set up. Not always accurately placed. For example the RR programme's Sydney NS range is shown north of the airport but in reality was south of it.
I still have no idea why navaids would show on FS9 and FSNav but not Plan G, unless the latter needs to know the folder paths which seems unlikely.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by connieguy on Oct 18, 2019 11:16:56 GMT -5
Yes, it does make sense, thanks, Bill. On the stray waypoints I didn't explain it clearly enough. Plan G is picking up other waypoints entirely, one was in the US mid-west, which must share some kind of code with the RR ones, which it does not show at all. Hence there are massive zig-zags in the plan, which is therefore useless. FS Navigator is simply a better program in that respect, as far as I can see, although I suppose RR is some way from being typical scenery,
Ken
|
|
|
Post by Defender on Oct 18, 2019 13:09:54 GMT -5
Indeed looks like a deficiency in Plan G. There are certainly many navaids world wide with the same identifier and possible the same frequency but not within range of each other. The only thing which I think can displace navaids is in the AT9xxxxxx files, airways and routes, where if you or any programme move any waypoint on a route, it moves the rest of that route's waypoints. That's possibly why you don't move stock navaids.
I will have another look at RR and see what's different from a normal AFCAD based navaid.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by connieguy on Oct 28, 2019 12:44:39 GMT -5
As others may have downloaded FS Navigator from the DC-3 Airways site I will just add something about an issue I came across which I have managed to solve. The database creation tool is in the Bin folder in the FS9 Modules/FSNavigator folder. The first time I ran it there was no problem. However, having changed one or two navaids I ran it again and it crashed on the Cal Classic Asia Pacific 1962 folder. When I deselected that it crashed on the Cal Classic Core folder. I then went into the Compatibility settings for the program and set it to run under Windows XP Service Pack 3. It then worked properly. There has been debate on the net about whether this is a legal copy of FS Navigator as some say that it has never been released as freeware. There has also been a suggestion that it would expire after 20 uses and demand a registration. It does not do this, and it is an excellent program.
Postscript. I am sorry to report that it does in fact expire after 20 Flight Sim sessions and as there is now no way of buying a registration that is it. A pity.
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Oct 31, 2019 12:24:29 GMT -5
In addition to the core FSNav (version 4.70) I have a collection of SIDs and STARs for Alaska and also for parts of Europe and Kenya. My internet connection is a bit dodgy and slow at the moment but by next weekend I should be able to send them off to anyone who needs them.
I also bought a registration back in the day which still works.
The issue with the database creation tool has several work-arounds which I can also share.
|
|
|
Post by connieguy on Nov 1, 2019 5:06:26 GMT -5
Thank you, Thomas. I have sent you a private message.
|
|
|
Post by davidmontreal on Oct 16, 2020 14:07:28 GMT -5
It seems to me that your members (especially connieguy) have an amazing depth of knowledge about post-war commercial flying which has prompted me to ask if anyone might be able to conjecture what happened on a BOAC flight my mother and I, as a baby, took from London to Montreal in 1947. Navigator’s Logbook entries for 1947, BOAC Constellation G-AHEL London to Shannon; 28 Nov. dep 19:28 arr 21:12, flying time 1hr 44mins Shannon to Santa Maria; 29 Nov. dep 00:03 arr 05:13, flying time 5hr 10mins Santa Maria to Santa Maria; 29 Nov. dep 07:26 arr 16:25, flying time 8hr 59mins Santa Maria to Gander; 30 Nov. dep 05:03 arr 14:52, flying time 9hr 49mins Gander to New York; 30 Nov. dep 17:00 arr 22:35, flying time 5hr 35mins New York to Montreal; 1 Dec. dep 13:56 arr 15:45, flying time 1hr 49mins My mother explained to me that we departed and returned to Santa Maria after nine hours because the aircraft got lost and had to return. I doubt that this was the reason and ask if anyone might have a better explanation; perhaps the weather or fuel forced a return. It seems you fly a simulator of G-AHEK with knowledge of Atlantic weather for any date and you might have a clue. I often ponder the fate of the BSAA Star Tiger which departed Santa Maria during the same winter, barely two months later. My first post. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by chris_c on Oct 16, 2020 17:49:49 GMT -5
Welcome, Davidmontreal.
I suspect that G-AHEL was never "lost", Newfoundland represented a far larger navigation target than the Azores after all. My wild a$$ed guess would be unexpected headwinds requiring a return to Santa Maria at or before the planned "point of no return". Presumably this would have been at about the five-hour or so mark and headwinds out mean tailwinds back.
Chris
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 16, 2020 19:45:16 GMT -5
I agree it could be unexpected headwinds, and they reached (or calculated) the "point of no return" and found they needed to turn back.
But the other thing I can think of would be a mechanical issue that occurred before the point of no return, and thus they turned back. Considering you were on the ground for 13 hours at Santa Maria after your return, this would not be a surprising reason. The Connies had their teething pains and they were not eliminated by 1947. But the other reason for the 13 hour stay could have been the crew needed rest, and then the headwind explanation makes just as much sense.
|
|
|
Post by Defender on Oct 17, 2020 13:45:51 GMT -5
Headwinds. Even the next day took nearly 10 hours for under 1,500 miles.
Bill
|
|
|
Post by Tom/CalClassic on Oct 17, 2020 14:29:01 GMT -5
You're right Bill, that is slow!
|
|
|
Post by Defender on Oct 17, 2020 14:37:24 GMT -5
Shows how important it was to know where you are. Reminds me of the story about the discovery of jetstreams when a B-29 navigator told the captain that the aircraft must be going backwards!
Bill
|
|
|
Post by mrcapitalism on Oct 19, 2020 19:33:55 GMT -5
I really can't describe the feeling I've gotten from the last several posts. It's very rewarding, and I'll try to put it into words: It's amazing to me that David found these detailed records of this flight. I can't even really understand how these records exist, they're incredibly detailed. If they were a real Navigator's Logbook they would be into much greater detail than was available here (and how would a single passenger get ahold of them?). Is this some sort of souvenir "logbook" for passengers to keep of their flight? Filled out by the stweard or crew? It even includes the A/C registration, cities, and flight times accurate to the minute! What an amazing find. This flight occurred 10 years before my father was born. Because of the excellent quality of our modern flight simulators, 3rd party weather injection programs, and the high quality freeware CalClassic Propliners and tutorials, I have a level of familiarity with the scenario despite being about as removed from it as possible. The time difference. I've probably seen an airworthy Connie (MATS) once. I've never flown one, and I've never been to Santa Maria or Gander. Yet even that far removed, I have been given the virtual experience to read Defenders very simple summary, and agree that this must have been a very hard flight against a challenging headwind. I've had some thought about the example for the diversion given by your mother. I think if there had been a mechanical problem, this fact would have been well remembered by the passengers, and explained by the crew. The crew may have honestly told the passengers they were returning due to winds, and because the context is relatively obscure, the passengers may not have understood the significance. They passengers may have explained, perhaps as a joke, that the crew was lost and had to turn back. That joke may have passed down through history as the reason for the delay... but these detailed flight records appear to tell the truth (wherever they came from). What an incredibly interesting story. As Tom said, they spend 13 hours on the ground after the diversion. A mechanical problem is possible, but considering they had already flown 9 hours, and looking forward to another 10 for the next attempt, a single crew would be on duty for probably 20 hours plus. There little chance BOAC staffed the flight for that. And I have no idea if BOAC kept an entire constellation crew on reserve in Santa Maria. Those 13 hours would certainly be rest to reset the legal limits for that same crew the next day. And yes, I think it's basically a right of passage for every new pilot to fly the airplane backwards (over the ground) on a very windy day
|
|
|
Post by davidmontreal on Oct 20, 2020 13:31:09 GMT -5
Thank you for your insightful replies. I am humbled by your knowledge of aviation while I struggle to understand the format of this forum. My source of information is my father’s logbook. He was the navigator on his twelfth crossing of the Atlantic with BOAC but first to Santa Maria. His wife and baby son (me) were on-board to move from Bristol to Montreal when flying operations moved from Whitchurch to Dorval in 1947. My mother’s comment about being lost was in earnest but my father always dismissed her statement as silly without offering an alternative explanation. All his logbooks were hidden away in the attic and later discovered when I attended his funeral twenty-four years ago. I had never seen any of them before. He remained as silent about this long flight to Montreal as he did about his wartime tour of operations over Northwest Europe in Wellingtons. I suspect it might have been a harrowing experience which he was reluctant to share especially with the added concern for his wife and baby son in the passenger cabin. For completeness the only facts missing from my transcription of the logbook are the Captains’ names; Capt Frost from London to Gander and Capt Messenger from Gander to Montreal. The navigator stayed on board working for the complete trip while the remainder of the crew slipped at Gander. The other missing text in the remarks column was “13A 242” – maybe a route number. I assume the logbook is official with each double-page numbered from 1 to 101. All pages are filled with no page missing and all entries are in ink. There is no title or text on the hardcovers but “Form 873A” is printed on the inside front cover. If anyone wishes I can copy the logbook page with my phone if I can be told how to post it. Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by johnl on Oct 20, 2020 14:34:06 GMT -5
A first-hand account of an Atlantic crossing and return on the Heathrow-Shannon-Gander-La Guardia route in BOAC's G-AHEL "Bangor II" can be found at airscapemag.com/2015/03/02/constellation-crossing/ . Flown in June 1946, with altitude limited to 10000 due to "a cabin supercharger problem affecting all Constellations".
|
|