Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 43

Thread: The FS2004 challenge

  1. #1
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,317

    The FS2004 challenge

    There are a number of cunning flights I've come up with:

    Threading the needle
    You're in a C172 at Space Coast, Florida (KTIX). Just to the north is a long bridge bound by street lights across to Cape Canaveral. Can you fly the Cessna through across the bridge in between the street lights with hitting them?

    I've tried many times. One time I almost got all the way through. I believe the rudder is the only way to control it accurately enough and full flap is necessary to keep the airspeed low.

    Bumper planes
    Can you fly your aircraft into another in the air? I've done it and I think it bounced off.

    CAT IIIc
    Pick a large international airport with a CAT III ILS, such as Heathrow (EGLL). Set the weather to no visibility and cloud down to the surface so you can't see a smegging thing. Then land your aircraft safely ot the CAT III airport on nothing but instruments. The key is to follow the ILS in. If there is an inner marker, when you pass that, pitch up to landing attitude and hold it their at idle power. If not, use the DME. Get established early on and holding the localiser at one mile is very difficult.

    I've done it three times in a B777. The first time I used the autopilot to get most of the way down. The second time I was fully in control all the way and landing safely but on the taxiway to the side of the runway. The third time in full control, I landed on the runway nicely.

    B777 at Southend
    Land a Boeing 777 at Southend (EGMC) RWY 24. I've tried many times but it always results in a crash.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    12,454

    Re: The FS2004 challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Glom
    B777 at Southend
    Land a Boeing 777 at Southend (EGMC) RWY 24. I've tried many times but it always results in a crash.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    2,440
    I assume FS2004 is a video game --- either that, or Glom is actually Bruce Willis's character from Unbreakable

    I assume you've tried to fly a Cessna through the Arc de Triomphe? It's been done for real, so it's probably easy in the game.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,087
    Quote Originally Posted by pghnative
    I assume FS2004 is a video game
    Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004. I wouldn't call it a "game" exactly -- it is a true simulator.

    Glom, I'd want you to be on my plane if anything happened to the pilot and co-pilot! (as long as it's not to Southend in a 777 ).

    I've been wanting to buy and play one of the Flight Sims for some time, now -- especially the B737. I would feel more secure in flying (not that I am insecure, now) if I had at least a rudimentary knowledge of the controls of that particular airplane -- just in case.

  5. #5
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,317
    Feel free to inform British Airways of that.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    255
    I tried landing the 777 at Southend. Let's just say that I landed a bit short. I keep forgetting the difference between where I am and where the wheels are when flying the big planes. ops:

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    520

    Re: The FS2004 challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Glom
    Bumper planes
    Can you fly your aircraft into another in the air? I've done it and I think it bounced off.
    One time, I was "flying" a Cessna (172 or 182, I forget which) from St. Petersburg, Florida to Tampa International Airport, with the air traffic control thing turned on. I was following their directions and was about to turn right for final approach. Suddenly, a big jet flashed before my eyes, incredibly close. As I completed the turn, I could see the jet about to land on the runway I was cleared for. Sheez.

    Another time, I actually attempted to run into other aircraft. ATC got all mad and quit talking to me.

    Actually, I think both of those events were with FS2002, but it's not much different. I haven't used FS2004 much yet.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    35
    ATC in FS 2004 still has some issues with aircraft spacing. When I try to land small planes at the large airports, I'm always getting overtaken by jumbo jets. I usually either turn off traffic at that point, or just ignore ATC's request to go around, and instead try to land on the same runway as the jet. :P

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    255
    Quote Originally Posted by kanathan
    ATC in FS 2004 still has some issues with aircraft spacing. When I try to land small planes at the large airports, I'm always getting overtaken by jumbo jets. I usually either turn off traffic at that point, or just ignore ATC's request to go around, and instead try to land on the same runway as the jet. :P
    It's even worse when you add on AI traffic. At some airports like Atlanta and O'Hare, I have over 80 arrivals and 80 departures in one hour. It's nice having real airlines with somewhat realistic timetables, but it's a pain when 3 or 4 planes are trying to land at once and I'm behind them. Usually I just pause the game, raise the simulation rate to 8x then bring it back down. That usually clears the path in front of me.

  10. #10
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,317
    Quote Originally Posted by kanathan
    ATC in FS 2004 still has some issues with aircraft spacing. When I try to land small planes at the large airports, I'm always getting overtaken by jumbo jets. I usually either turn off traffic at that point, or just ignore ATC's request to go around, and instead try to land on the same runway as the jet. :P
    Yeah, I noticed that. They don't do traffic planning. There are no SIDs and STARs. No holds or pilot interpretted procedures. Basically, they vector every aircraft they have onto final, and it's a first-come-first-serve basis. If you're too near, you have to go around and go to the back of the queue. Not very effective.

    When I was flying into Houston airport, I was cleared to land, but as I got a closer look at the runway, I say that they had just cleared an MD-80 to takeoff so I was on short final, cleared to land, with an aircraft lining up. The clearance wasn't even conditional.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,084
    "...Using the best aerial photography from the USA's leading supplier, VFR Photographic Scenery USA [/UK] will literally transform your simulation experience with Microsoft Flight Simulator..."
    http://www.horizonsimulation.com/Landing/index.html

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,148
    I dread to think what kind of machine you need to run with that and the VFR terrain modelling they sell, though.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    3,092

    Re: The FS2004 challenge

    Quote Originally Posted by Glom
    There are a number of cunning flights I've come up with:

    ...
    Bumper planes
    Can you fly your aircraft into another in the air? I've done it and I think it bounced off.
    ...
    Not to hijack (I know, weak pun) this thread, but does anyone remember the old game Stunts (one of the first PC games where you could build your own racetrack in 3D)? In that game, when you hit anything on a very, very low speed, you would bounce off it with incredible force, flying a hundred metres high or so. A bug, but one of the funniest bugs I have encountered

  14. #14
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,317
    New challenge

    Emin Muil

    Set weather to 3mi visibility with cloud base of 1500ft. Select whatever aircraft you want (I choose a B777, but probably the 300S would be more practical) and make your location KSEA RWY 34R. After takeoff, climn and maintain 1500ft turn right heading 045 and hold that heading until you reach the mountains. Then work your way through the labrinyth of the mountains to find Mt St Helens and climb it. (Don't just fly over them, that's cheating, fly low along the valleys) I personally think the 777 looks really cool flying through Emin Muil, but it's not the most maneuverable, meaning I've had many a crash.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,133
    My favourite:

    At Meigs (is it? defult flight in fs96 I think), fly down the road that passes that very tall building with two poles sticking out of the top in the extra, pull up so you fly vertically up the building then do a stall spin and see how well you can keep it lined up with the building and the road.

    Tha's just the warm up.

    Approach the same building from out at sea so that when you fly vertically up the side of the building one pole is "above" you and the other is "below". This time stall spin between the two poles so that you see the top of the building going from right to left across your screen before you plumet down the opposite side.

    Now do a quarter outside loop out of the vertical descent and play dodge the buildings upside down for a bit.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    1,885
    One thing I like for a short but interesting hop is you fly from Baglung(VNBL) to Jomsom(VNJS) in Nepal using a 152 or 172. I don't use FSNav or any of that other stuff for this, just learn the way and fly it. It's pretty tough, at least it is if you manage your own mixture. I don't know how it is with automix, might be a snap.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    12,454
    Quote Originally Posted by worzel
    My favourite:

    At Meigs (is it? defult flight in fs96 I think), fly down the road that passes that very tall building with two poles sticking out of the top in the extra, pull up so you fly vertically up the building then do a stall spin and see how well you can keep it lined up with the building and the road.

    Tha's just the warm up.

    Approach the same building from out at sea so that when you fly vertically up the side of the building one pole is "above" you and the other is "below". This time stall spin between the two poles so that you see the top of the building going from right to left across your screen before you plumet down the opposite side.

    Now do a quarter outside loop out of the vertical descent and play dodge the buildings upside down for a bit.
    Meigs Airport is near a really big lake in downtown Chicago. :wink:

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    1,078
    Quote Originally Posted by Candy
    Quote Originally Posted by worzel
    My favourite:

    At Meigs (is it? defult flight in fs96 I think), fly down the road that passes that very tall building with two poles sticking out of the top in the extra, pull up so you fly vertically up the building then do a stall spin and see how well you can keep it lined up with the building and the road.

    Tha's just the warm up.

    Approach the same building from out at sea so that when you fly vertically up the side of the building one pole is "above" you and the other is "below". This time stall spin between the two poles so that you see the top of the building going from right to left across your screen before you plumet down the opposite side.

    Now do a quarter outside loop out of the vertical descent and play dodge the buildings upside down for a bit.
    Meigs Airport is near a really big lake in downtown Chicago. :wink:
    A "really big Great lake" to be exact! (Michigan, to be even more exact. . .)

    that very tall building would be the Sears Tower. For many years the tallest building in the world.

    fyi. Meigs field is no longer. The mayor snuck a back-hoe out there a few years back and had it dig a big "X" in the runway, thereby making it unusable. All the people with planes still at the airport had to get them hauled off by boat. Really P.O.'d a bunch of chicagoans!!! :x

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    493
    Oh; those are easy...
    Want a challenge; try taking off and landing at Rio Amazonas (SESM) in a 737.

    Cheers!

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Posts
    9,084
    Quote Originally Posted by Candy
    ... Meigs Airport is near a really big lake in downtown Chicago. :wink:
    No longer---thanks to Mayor Daley's 'vision'!

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    35
    Quote Originally Posted by Glom
    Yeah, I noticed that. They don't do traffic planning. There are no SIDs and STARs. No holds or pilot interpretted procedures. Basically, they vector every aircraft they have onto final, and it's a first-come-first-serve basis. If you're too near, you have to go around and go to the back of the queue. Not very effective.
    A few days ago, I found an online ATC system for Flight Sim called VATSIM. I haven't had a lot of time to play with it, but it looks interesting. Once you get the software set up, you can fly online with a couple hundred other pilots while being directed by ATC run by real people. (I've seen everywhere from 15 to 100+ controllers depending on the time of day) The controllers are trained and seem to know what they're doing, so you can do SID/STAR approaches and departures, along with holds and all the other realistic procedures pilots have to deal with. It was a little difficult to set up at first, but supposively a new version of the software is coming out soon that'll make connecting a piece of cake.

  22. #22
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,317
    I figured out the Southend problem. It started of with me flaring to much to make the landing nice and short, but that means a tail strike on that long aircraft. Then, when I kept the nose attitude low, the landing was too hard. So, the solution is to apply a bit of a power and hold off that way to soften the landing. I've become more aware of that as applying a bit of cushioning power has been important when doing night landings for real. I've now gotten a much better success rate at Southend, but it's tricky because the approach hold chases the glide path too much.

    I'm currently in the middle of EGLL-KSEA. The high altitude airways routing has taken me near to the North Pole, where it is 200K. The air is dense and economy is poor. I might have just enough fuel to complete the flight. The animation of the aurora borealis is cool though.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,579
    Not FS2004, but for those who know Falcon 4.0 (the original out of the box version, before I did some internet upgrades with various results...)

    (I play on most realistic settings).

    *Landing your F16 in that sim is very hard. I still can't always succeed in that (on an airfield, that is). Once I managed to land on a sandway in the scenery however. The only damage was a bit of avionics failing. I still could depart afterwards. Those who've flown that simulator know how difficult that feat is.

    *I once had hit a C-130 with the gun. I was completely out of ammo and still needed to down the C-130, which was smoking a bit by now, but still capable of flying. The C-130 was flying along the coastline, a bit offset towards the water. It was flying low to get away (it didn't know I was out of ammo of course). What happened:
    I came in on the C130 from behind. I came in too fast and overshot him from above. Right when I was above his cockpit, I pushed my nose down. The C130 did the same to avoid a collision. My agile F16 managed to pull up again just above the water. The damaged C130 however...
    Only minor disadvantage is that forcing an enemy into the scenery is not registered as a kill..

    I don't have time for flight simulators now (and no money for Century of Flight), but from september on, I'll be following my masters in Aerospace engineering - control&simulation. A masters in creating flight simulators with hands-on exercises. 8)

    I already showed the lecturersmy capabilities by flying the Wright flyer from runway to town and back in a commercial sim (not ACOF) without any practice. My only problem are rudder pedals: I learned pedal steering in cranes, which work (like tanks) just the other way round compared to planes and boat rudders. So I really have to keep my mind into it, otherwise I'd push on the wrong pedal . Not to hijack this thread, but I find the "reactive" logic behind tank rudder pedals the same as the logic behind a steering wheel or stick, so I think the current way of rudder pedals is a discrepancy in steering controls logic.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    228
    Or fly round the world....

    http://www.theheavenlyhangar.com/REA...R/fla_main.htm

    Cheers
    John

  25. #25
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    628
    Oh; those are easy...
    Want a challenge; try taking off and landing at Rio Amazonas (SESM) in a 737.

    Cheers!
    Bizzarely i`ve found that easier in the 747. One thing you have to watch on the rather steep descent is that the collision detection doesnt line up with the terrain at all well.

    As for F4. The out of the box version was far more tolorant of wheels up landing than the current versions. I had a tendancy to get shot up so i got good at 'no avionics full stick roll deflection wheels up landings in fields'. Given the bugs i also got good at avoiding the APCs the drive across runways or the aircraft taking off and landing in front of me even though i have clearance.
    Its one that lots of people seem to have trouble landing at first but i didnt. I think the tutorials fixate on the AoA gauge wheras i didnt bother reading the tutorials and just eyeballed it using the fpm.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,579
    Quote Originally Posted by jumbo
    Oh; those are easy...
    Want a challenge; try taking off and landing at Rio Amazonas (SESM) in a 737.

    Cheers!
    Bizzarely i`ve found that easier in the 747. One thing you have to watch on the rather steep descent is that the collision detection doesnt line up with the terrain at all well.

    As for F4. The out of the box version was far more tolorant of wheels up landing than the current versions. I had a tendancy to get shot up so i got good at 'no avionics full stick roll deflection wheels up landings in fields'. Given the bugs i also got good at avoiding the APCs the drive across runways or the aircraft taking off and landing in front of me even though i have clearance.
    Its one that lots of people seem to have trouble landing at first but i didnt. I think the tutorials fixate on the AoA gauge wheras i didnt bother reading the tutorials and just eyeballed it using the fpm.
    Uhm, could you do a wheels up landing in a field on maximum realism settings in F4? (I had an out of the box version, IIRC the european version was some version numbers higher than the original US box, however not yet the latest official patch). It's not that I don't believe you, but that seems just so improbable to me. What I loved in F4 was when your stabilisation computer was destroyed. You plane would be rather controllable, and then suddenly hit one of its instability modes and violently flip over. If you experience that at 5m before the runway treshold... a tailplane is not a landing gear . I aslo loved the time that I scraped a mountain, which correctly broke of the pods and bombs hitting the ground, and left the others attached 8) .
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  27. #27
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    11,317
    Over 24hours after I started the EGLL-KSEA flight, I finally finished it (I paused the game for a while to sleep and attend lectures). I started at dawn, but because I went over the Arctic, the sun set in the east and most of the flight was at night, which allowed me to see those cool aurora animations. Things got a bit confusing for the autopilot near the middle when we flew very close to the magnetic pole so the direct track kept on changing very quickly. The temperature was 200K at one point so the air was so dense, the groundspeed was only about 420kt, even though it is usually around 480kt. I had quite a scare with the fuel. We flew over Alaska and then turned eastward to fly down the Pacific coast towards Seattle. The sun quickly rose because of our easterly motion and the aurora stopped. When establishing on the localiser, I got dangerously close to a 747, which I thought was going to force me into a go-around, which I didn't want to do because of the fuel, so I planned to make one or two 360s for seperation. But fortunately, I realised that the 747 was landing on another runway so I flew straight in for a nice gentle landing with a bit of power for cushioning. When I taxiied back and shutdown, I saw that I had less than 15,000 pounds left out of a tank of 300,000. That's 95% burn, which is quite startling given that you need 5% reserve on an extra hour for diversion.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    628
    Uhm, could you do a wheels up landing in a field on maximum realism settings in F4? (I had an out of the box version, IIRC the european version was some version numbers higher than the original US box, however not yet the latest official patch). It's not that I don't believe you, but that seems just so improbable to me.
    I have the UK version and it was possible but required the jet to be let down very very gently. My technique was get the jet striaght and level. Place the fpm on the horizon whilst under 190 knots and at about 50 feet. Then reduce throttle a tiny fraction and it would settle quite nicely. It became far harder in SP3 onwards. In SP3 the plane tends to become airborne again and roll hideously. At that point ejection is the only option. It one of those things i try in a sim as i loath the mentality of some sims that if its not put down on the wheels on a runway then the plane automatically explodes.

    IIRC theres footage floating about the net of one of the prototype F16's perfoming a good wheels up landing.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,579
    Not really healthy for the plane, I assume .

    Overall I like the realism of F4. You can indeed do lots of things with your plane without having an explosion per sť, but you need to be very gently, like in real life. I made numerous landings which ended up as belly landings ops: but did not explode the plane because I did things rather gently.

    Still =D> for a succesfull landing in the fields!

    Edit to add: what I notied when switching to a faster system, ws that flying went better with a more powerful PC. My first one wasn't really capable of calculating things fast, which was reflected in the behaviour of the plane.
    With sufficient thrust, water towers fly just fine.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    628
    Well the crew chief of the plane prbably wouldnt have been pleased!

    I think F4 is currently the leader for realism in jet combat sims. Especially given the later patches and community work. Now if only it looked as nice as fs2004.

Similar Threads

  1. Where In The Universe Challenge #107
    By Fraser in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2010-Jun-03, 05:10 PM
  2. FS2004 - I don't think so...
    By Bearded One in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 2006-Dec-23, 12:30 AM
  3. Stupid FS2004 flying lessons
    By Glom in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 2005-Jan-18, 01:07 AM
  4. A challenge
    By SirPolish in forum Conspiracy Theories
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 2003-Aug-01, 05:04 AM
  5. A Challenge!
    By Peace_Rules in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 2003-May-14, 10:27 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •