LawnDart

Not at all Beaker... Also clearly stated if one were to follow the link to our recruiting post. :P

The requirements are listed via the image link "click to apply" in the first post, but here they are: http://www.virtualthunderbirds.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=313 Activity level... http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1529505&postcount=14 I'll be honest with you, anyone not residing on the North American continent is going to have a helluva time with lag/ping and probably won't make the cut. Most of your other questions are answered in the first link above.

We've taken a slightly different apporach to how we publish new videos and screenshots this season. The current goal has been to fly a sortie, usually a complete show profile, then quickly put something together using the most current footage and release it ASAP (sometimes in less than 24 hours) to kind of give our viewers a look into our season as it progresses. While some of the flying may not be perfect (it never is anyway), it gives you an opportunity to see us refine our flying on an every day basis in preparation for live events (such as VFAT for example). Here's a recent look into the diary of the VTB... We usually practice two nights per week (in case anyone is wondering). :joystick: A fan favorite from 2012: [VV]41801418[/VV] From two weeks ago (previously posted here): [VV]46911555[/VV] Two from last week: [VV]47353897[/VV] [VV]47383628[/VV] One from this week: [VV]47685291[/VV] More... coming soon. Meanwhile enjoy our other videos @ www.vimeo.com/VirtualTbirds

Not quite the real deal... We're still the Virtual Thunderbirds, not the USAF Thunderbirds. ;)

You'd fit right in. Three of us are former CFI/CFII/MEI and two of us are also former firefighters (one professional). ;) "You always think you'll find more time later in life, but truth is you'll probably never have as much time as you have today"...

It varies every week. With three of our current members being airline pilots our schedules can be everything from havoc to heaven! We generally meet up on average 2-3 late nights per week and it can occur on any day of the week, often on consecutive days (typically we spend a few hours each time with one sortie lasting ~50 minutes). One of the reasons we fly late nights is to avoid dinner-, spouse-, kids- conflicts (across four time zones) and to be able to devote 100% to practice once we get going. There's no pause button once we start (and taking breaks isn't really an option either)... only the early hours are our enemy, so it helps to be a night owl. Ells, we'd love to have you as an exchange pilot sometime. ;)

Man, tripping down memory lane... First significant memory is playing 1v1 with a friend on Falcon (the original from 1986) via serial ports on two of my dad's computers in our basement either '86 or '87. Computers were ancient by today's standards... 286/386 maybe? :)

Since 2010, and with help from Blaze, we've been using a custom version of ED's F-16 flight model (SFM) in FC2.

We have a few open spots on the roster, and we're hoping to find a couple of good candidates. :pilotfly:

Posting this here even though it's a week old now. (We mostly use Facebook these days for our updates: http://www.facebook.com/VirtualTbirds). We flew the Delta Series in this video on August 2 and released the video titled "In Time" because of the quick turnaround time the following day. Enjoy! [VV]46911555[/VV]

If you can afford it, the Logitech G930 is awesome! Haven't regretted getting it a single day since I bought it some years ago... The headband extension leaves a perfect fit for the TrackIR clip to attach to. (I added a USB battery pack for my TrackIR clip to make it all wireless). The G930 is also wireless! It comes with a USB dongle plug-in for charging. (A charge holds for ~10 hours or so at a time). Neat feature is the G-keys, allowing you to assign your push-to-talk on one of the buttons on the side of your headset itself (in addition to keyboard/joystick of course), so whenever you leave your mancave to go make yourself a late night sandwich you won't miss a word... and you can still participate in the fray (albeit with a mouth full). http://www.logitech.com/en-us/gaming/headsets/wireless-gaming-headset-g930

Side note: Our min required landing distance data IRL for the jet I'm currently flying (CRJ 900) increases by as much as up to 40% for wet runways. All depends on the runway, its gradient, other factors etc. calculated by data provided from dispatch... but just to give you an idea. The actual landing distance doesn't increase as much as the required distance (unless you hydroplane of course), but it can be a significant number, too. Now, consider what an icy, snow-covered runway will do... :P

Aha! :lol: BTW, that face was confusion.

:huh:

I've never used this technique in any jet I've flown. It works better using pitch for airspeed and power for altitude in smaller props and general aviation IMHO. In jets I just point the nose for the aiming point and adjust throttles for airspeed (otherwise you could find yourself chasing the glideslope/visual approach path... quite badly). As mentioned they do go hand-in-hand, but I always start with airspeed adjustment needed = power, and altitude/aiming point adjustment = pitch. It also helps greatly knowing the typical N1 setting (or N2 if preferred) you're looking for while established on final approach and fully configured. It'll vary a little depending on your weight but not significantly. Referencing your target N1 also helps - for example: If you're high, but on speed you'd pitch to correct for the glideslope and adjust throttle to a setting lower than your target N1 since you're steepening up your approach path to remain on speed. Other scenario: If you're on glidepath, but Vref +10 you'd reduce throttle to a setting lower than your target N1 and then add a little back pressure as your speed decreases to remain on glideslope. Once re-established, set power to ~N1 target and pitch for picture (aiming point).

That varies for each airport and approach in the real world since it depends on terrain, obstacles etc., but generally the final approach fix is ~5nm from the threshold and, as mentioned, if you multiply your distance by 300 (feet/nm) you get a close estimate of the altitude you'd need for a 3 degree glideslope (5nm x 300 = 1,500'). Just add the field elev to your number and you'll have the altitude (above MSL) to use (e.g. 1,500 + 147 = 1647 feet... Round it up to the closest hundreth, and you'll use 1,700 feet and plan on your glideslope intercept to occur just outside the 5nm fix. This is assuming you're using QNH). Using that as a baseline if you don't know the published intercept altitude for a particular airport you would fly straight and level, intercept the localizer first at ~1,500 feet above the field then, once established outside the marker (5+ nm or more), intercept the glideslope from that altitude and track it down.

QNH — The barometric pressure as reported by a particular station (local altimeter setting, reading altitude above sea level) QFE — Altimeter setting referenced to airport field elevation (where field elevation equals zero feet) QNE — Pressure altitude (29.92 inHg or 1013.2 mb/hPa, altitude above the standard reference plane) Think of: QNH = Nautical Height QFE = Field Elevation QNE = Nil Elevation or NEither of the other two ;)

Agree, using the same settings to begin with helps greatly. Also, as mentioned, the finer control inputs you can do the better off you'll be - but just because one pilot isn't making any changes doesn't mean you might not need to move your own controls since your aircraft is displaced (in space) from the flight lead while in formation. Any climb, descent, turn or correction won't be identical between two airplanes in the formation, albeit often only small differences in input are noted. Adjusting MP is what you'd do in the real plane as well when flying a constant speed prop. Typically you only set and reset your RPM a few times during a flight, such as climbout, cruise, before landing etc., so while maneuvering you'd have it set prior as well and then use your throttle (MP) to add or reduce power. Aerobatic flying demands a little more power than cruising around. The side effect of maneuvering with more power is that the left turning tendencies such as P-factor, adverse yaw and torque are more prevalent in high AoA, low speed and high power setting instances (which is where you'd find yourself over the top of a loop or rolling maneuver typically).

FWIW, I just upgraded from two GTX 460s SLI to a single GTX 670 and I couldn't be happier. It's night and day how solid the performance is, even though my previous setup wasn't exactly hurting my frames either. I run everything 1920x1080 on a 40" screen with maxed out graphics settings and rarely ever run into any kind of framerate issues, and I'm quite picky about keeping them at a constant high, too (>40 fps in DCS/LOFC or 60 fps mimumum in newer games that take better advantage of your GPU). We all know DCS/LOFC is mostly CPU bottlenecked, but I'm rarely ever below 45 fps in the most graphic intense areas with cockpit shadows and every other setting as high as they'll go (MSAA 4x+). Other games such as BF3 I'm usually seeing 70-80 fps or more with Ultra settings maxed out in battle. My specs are in my sig. I'm also running an older generation i7 (just like you, although the Bloomfield), so hopefully this helps some... My advice: I think if you buy a newer and faster CPU/Mobo combo you're going to want a better GPU as well, so why not start with a 670 and see! You can always transfer it to your new build eventually... I bought the EVGA GTX 670 FTW (uses the same PCB as the GTX 680, but with fewer CUDA cores - otherwise the same card). I'd highly recommend that card!

I was thinking the exact same thing while I was watching!!! :music_whistling::smilewink:

Thanks, checking it out now. :)

Some very nice framing and editing! Great job! What's the fx package used? (It's not After Effects is it).

:thumbup: :thumbdown: Calypso thumbs up (one thumbs up is inverted). Great article Smokin' Hole! I can definitely relate to the intro in your story as someone who told myself I would keep a hand in general aviation when I began flying for the airlines, but somehow it slips away from you (no pun intended). Since then, before and after, many simulators have filled that void... Thanks for sharing!

If ED would quit naming all their updates using only the numbers one, two and zero: 1.2.0, 1.1.2.0, 1.12, 1.1.1, 1.1.1.2, 1.0.2, 1.2.1.0, 1.1.1.2 etc. you get the point - there wouldn't be as much confusion. :P 1.2.0 = 1.2.0.63205 ;)

But you get to download DCS World for free now instead! :smilewink: