Discussion:
Redbird's new full-motion, low-cost flight simulator
(too old to reply)
Mxsmanic
2010-07-05 00:23:29 UTC
Permalink
See

http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
j***@specsol.spam.sux.com
2010-07-05 01:49:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
So have you ordered yours yet?
--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.
Mike Ash
2010-07-05 03:14:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Hmmm, $58,800.... For that much, I could buy my glider outright (no
partnership) and pay for about 8 years of flying it. I think I'll
pass....

It is neat to see this tech become more commoditized, though.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
george
2010-07-05 05:09:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Ash
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Hmmm, $58,800.... For that much, I could buy my glider outright (no
partnership) and pay for about 8 years of flying it. I think I'll
pass....
It is neat to see this tech become more commoditized, though.
I could buy a B22 for that (a B22 is a microlight)
a
2010-07-05 08:50:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Ash
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Hmmm, $58,800.... For that much, I could buy my glider outright (no
partnership) and pay for about 8 years of flying it. I think I'll
pass....
It is neat to see this tech become more commoditized, though.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
It will be interesting to see how many hours get logged onto these at
a moderately busy flight school -- it could drive the price per hour
pretty low and still offer a nice ROI.
Mike Ash
2010-07-05 15:04:24 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by a
Post by Mike Ash
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Hmmm, $58,800.... For that much, I could buy my glider outright (no
partnership) and pay for about 8 years of flying it. I think I'll
pass....
It is neat to see this tech become more commoditized, though.
It will be interesting to see how many hours get logged onto these at
a moderately busy flight school -- it could drive the price per hour
pretty low and still offer a nice ROI.
Right, it's obviously aimed at schools that can rent it out to students.
I imagine it could become pretty cheap in that setting. I also imagine a
few rich crazy people will end up with installations in their homes. :)
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
a
2010-07-05 15:49:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Ash
In article
Post by a
Post by Mike Ash
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Hmmm, $58,800.... For that much, I could buy my glider outright (no
partnership) and pay for about 8 years of flying it. I think I'll
pass....
It is neat to see this tech become more commoditized, though.
It will be interesting to see how many hours get logged onto these at
a moderately busy flight school -- it could drive the price per hour
pretty low and still offer a nice ROI.
Right, it's obviously aimed at schools that can rent it out to students.
I imagine it could become pretty cheap in that setting. I also imagine a
few rich crazy people will end up with installations in their homes. :)
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
Had a funny thought: will the schools offer a dry rate (bring your own
extension cord)?

The reality is, use would have to be pretty high, for 2000 hour rental
years -- that's 40 hours a week, the device alone would have to earn
$10 an hour for a 3 year payback, and that contributes nothing for
space and instruction time. A more realistic use rate might be 500
hours a year, device charges $40 an hour for a 3 year payback (more or
less a 30% ROI, not a bad target for high risk ventures). I think I'll
keep my checkbook unopened.

On the other hand, there are things I'd like to do in my airplane and
would happily pay a few hundred dollars to try them in a realistic
simulator.

Speaking of realistic sims, those of you who fly unpressurized with
O2, do try to get to a place where you can experience hypoxia under
supervision. The experience may be enough for you to decide to stay at
12k or under unless there's an emergency. Well, 15 or 16k if you're a
lot younger than me --and that would not be hard to be!
Mike Ash
2010-07-05 16:49:47 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by a
The reality is, use would have to be pretty high, for 2000 hour rental
years -- that's 40 hours a week, the device alone would have to earn
$10 an hour for a 3 year payback, and that contributes nothing for
space and instruction time. A more realistic use rate might be 500
hours a year, device charges $40 an hour for a 3 year payback (more or
less a 30% ROI, not a bad target for high risk ventures). I think I'll
keep my checkbook unopened.
For things where the simulator is just as good or better than a real
plane (practicing instrument procedures?) then $40/hour is a great rate.
But still somewhat hefty....
Post by a
On the other hand, there are things I'd like to do in my airplane and
would happily pay a few hundred dollars to try them in a realistic
simulator.
Oh yes. I'd easily pay WAY more than what I pay for actual flight time
to practice takeoff aborts at difficult altitudes in a simulator good
enough for the experience to translate into reality.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
a
2010-07-05 17:47:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Ash
In article
Post by a
The reality is, use would have to be pretty high, for 2000 hour rental
years -- that's 40 hours a week, the device alone would have to earn
$10 an hour for a 3 year payback, and that contributes nothing for
space and instruction time. A more realistic use rate might be 500
hours a year, device charges $40 an hour for a 3 year payback (more or
less a 30% ROI, not a bad target for high risk ventures). I think I'll
keep my checkbook unopened.
For things where the simulator is just as good or better than a real
plane (practicing instrument procedures?) then $40/hour is a great rate.
But still somewhat hefty....
Post by a
On the other hand, there are things I'd like to do in my airplane and
would happily pay a few hundred dollars to try them in a realistic
simulator.
Oh yes. I'd easily pay WAY more than what I pay for actual flight time
to practice takeoff aborts at difficult altitudes in a simulator good
enough for the experience to translate into reality.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
Mike, that $40 would not pay for the space rent, instructors, clerks,
other overheads. I agree that many of us would pay a few hundred
dollars for realistic sim of spin recovery, other outside the envelope
stuff. With a safety pilot aboard I've flown to touchdown under the
hood on an ILS, but man, if you don't feel the ground effect in time
you're going to bounce! a half dozen approaches from the OM inbound to
touchdown in zero zero in a full motion sim would be very comforting,
but I'd have to feel the ground effect cushion for it to be useful for
me. I'd also like to feel what it's like to have the airplane collect
enough ice to be dangerous, that would have to be a 'feel' thing
too.

I doubt that there is a full motion sim would do a good job at showing
someone a stall/spin entry -- can not do that in real life in a
Mooney, but man, in a suitable airplane with an instructor aboard,
what happens when the inside wing stalls in a too slow too steep turn
gets your attention! We got inverted in a heart beat. That is an
'unusual attitude' I never want to face in real life.
Vic Baron
2010-07-05 21:03:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by a
Post by Mike Ash
In article
Post by a
The reality is, use would have to be pretty high, for 2000 hour rental
years -- that's 40 hours a week, the device alone would have to earn
$10 an hour for a 3 year payback, and that contributes nothing for
space and instruction time. A more realistic use rate might be 500
hours a year, device charges $40 an hour for a 3 year payback (more or
less a 30% ROI, not a bad target for high risk ventures). I think I'll
keep my checkbook unopened.
For things where the simulator is just as good or better than a real
plane (practicing instrument procedures?) then $40/hour is a great rate.
But still somewhat hefty....
Post by a
On the other hand, there are things I'd like to do in my airplane and
would happily pay a few hundred dollars to try them in a realistic
simulator.
Oh yes. I'd easily pay WAY more than what I pay for actual flight time
to practice takeoff aborts at difficult altitudes in a simulator good
enough for the experience to translate into reality.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
Mike, that $40 would not pay for the space rent, instructors, clerks,
other overheads. I agree that many of us would pay a few hundred
dollars for realistic sim of spin recovery, other outside the envelope
stuff. With a safety pilot aboard I've flown to touchdown under the
hood on an ILS, but man, if you don't feel the ground effect in time
you're going to bounce! a half dozen approaches from the OM inbound to
touchdown in zero zero in a full motion sim would be very comforting,
but I'd have to feel the ground effect cushion for it to be useful for
me. I'd also like to feel what it's like to have the airplane collect
enough ice to be dangerous, that would have to be a 'feel' thing
too.
I doubt that there is a full motion sim would do a good job at showing
someone a stall/spin entry -- can not do that in real life in a
Mooney, but man, in a suitable airplane with an instructor aboard,
what happens when the inside wing stalls in a too slow too steep turn
gets your attention! We got inverted in a heart beat. That is an
'unusual attitude' I never want to face in real life.
I know what you mean. Got my ticket in the 60's and was lucky enough to have
an instructor that had an AT-6 so spins, stalls and some VERY unusual
attitudes were the norm. Would not want to see them again. :)

Perhaps a CFI will chime in here but IIRC, they do NOT teach spin recovery
any longer in the US or at least, it is not required.

Vic
a
2010-07-05 21:39:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vic Baron
Post by a
Post by Mike Ash
In article
Post by a
The reality is, use would have to be pretty high, for 2000 hour rental
years -- that's 40 hours a week, the device alone would have to earn
$10 an hour for a 3 year payback, and that contributes nothing for
space and instruction time. A more realistic use rate might be 500
hours a year, device charges $40 an hour for a 3 year payback (more or
less a 30% ROI, not a bad target for high risk ventures). I think I'll
keep my checkbook unopened.
For things where the simulator is just as good or better than a real
plane (practicing instrument procedures?) then $40/hour is a great rate.
But still somewhat hefty....
Post by a
On the other hand, there are things I'd like to do in my airplane and
would happily pay a few hundred dollars to try them in a realistic
simulator.
Oh yes. I'd easily pay WAY more than what I pay for actual flight time
to practice takeoff aborts at difficult altitudes in a simulator good
enough for the experience to translate into reality.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
Mike, that $40 would not pay for the space rent, instructors, clerks,
other overheads. I agree that many of us would pay a few hundred
dollars for realistic sim of spin recovery, other outside the envelope
stuff. With a safety pilot aboard I've flown to touchdown under the
hood on an ILS, but man, if you don't feel the ground effect in time
you're going to bounce! a half dozen approaches from the OM inbound to
touchdown in zero zero in a full motion sim would be very comforting,
but I'd have to feel the ground effect cushion for it to be useful for
me.  I'd also like to feel what it's like to have the airplane collect
enough ice to be dangerous, that would have to be a 'feel' thing
too.
I doubt that there is a full motion sim would do a good job at showing
someone a stall/spin entry -- can not do that in real life in a
Mooney, but man, in a suitable airplane with an instructor aboard,
what happens when the inside wing stalls in a too slow too steep turn
gets your attention! We got inverted in a heart beat. That is an
'unusual attitude' I never want to face in real life.
I know what you mean. Got my ticket in the 60's and was lucky enough to have
an instructor that had an AT-6 so spins, stalls and some VERY unusual
attitudes were the norm.  Would not want to see them again.   :)
Perhaps a CFI will chime in here but IIRC, they do NOT teach spin recovery
any longer in the US or at least, it is not required.
Vic
I don't think they are required --- the spin stuff I experienced was
long after I was instrument rated, it was a swap, he wanted a safety
pilot for instruments, I wanted some time up side down.
vaughn
2010-07-06 00:14:19 UTC
Permalink
Perhaps a CFI will chime in here but IIRC, they do NOT teach spin recovery any
longer in the US or at least, it is not required.
As far as I know, spin training is only required for the CFI certificate in the
USA. Only a signoff for the training is required, spins are never part of the
actual check ride.

As a student pilot, I insisted on pre-solo spin training. If I ever screwed up
enough to get myself into an inadvertent spin, I did not want to be required to
figure out spin recovery for myself!

Vaughn
Dimitri P.
2011-03-27 22:56:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by vaughn
As a student pilot, I insisted on pre-solo spin training. If I ever screwed up
enough to get myself into an inadvertent spin, I did not want to be required to
figure out spin recovery for myself!
well said. Especially figuring out spin recovery during short final,
where they are more likely to occur! I was fortunate enough to be part of
the student pilots where spin training was mandatory in Canada in 1999.
vaughn
2011-03-28 00:47:44 UTC
Permalink
As a student pilot, I insisted on pre-solo spin training. If I ever screwed
up
enough to get myself into an inadvertent spin, I did not want to be required
to
figure out spin recovery for myself!
well said. Especially figuring out spin recovery during short final, where
they are more likely to occur!
Huh? If you are on short final, you had better recover quickly from the
pre-stall, well before the actual stall and wing-drop! Because on short final
there isn't enough sky beneath you for a spin recovery. In fact, a befuddled
pilot may not be able to recover from pattern height at all. One of my main
take-home impressions from my pre-solo spin training was the loss of altitude
involved in the stall-spin-recovery sequence. It made me understand the
importance of maintaining airspeed and staying coordinated in the pattern.

Vaughn
brian whatcott
2011-03-28 01:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by vaughn
As a student pilot, I insisted on pre-solo spin training. If I ever screwed
up
enough to get myself into an inadvertent spin, I did not want to be required
to
figure out spin recovery for myself!
well said. Especially figuring out spin recovery during short final, where
they are more likely to occur!
Huh? If you are on short final, you had better recover quickly from the
pre-stall, well before the actual stall and wing-drop! Because on short final
there isn't enough sky beneath you for a spin recovery. In fact, a befuddled
pilot may not be able to recover from pattern height at all. One of my main
take-home impressions from my pre-solo spin training was the loss of altitude
involved in the stall-spin-recovery sequence. It made me understand the
importance of maintaining airspeed and staying coordinated in the pattern.
Vaughn
Now you're talking!

Brian W
brian whatcott
2011-03-28 01:30:29 UTC
Permalink
As a student pilot, I insisted on pre-solo spin training. If I ever
screwed up
enough to get myself into an inadvertent spin, I did not want to be required to
figure out spin recovery for myself!
well said. Especially figuring out spin recovery during short final,
where they are more likely to occur! I was fortunate enough to be part
of the student pilots where spin training was mandatory in Canada in 1999.
Hmmm...'short final' means <500 ft to me.
Spin recovery means more than 500 ft to me.

Better to maintain approach speed, and recover from a stall if you must,
not a spin.

Briaan W
Dimitri P.
2011-03-28 02:49:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by brian whatcott
Hmmm...'short final' means <500 ft to me.
Spin recovery means more than 500 ft to me.
Better to maintain approach speed, and recover from a stall if you must,
not a spin.
Very true. But a spin (incipient) -- or any other type of cross-control
stall is more likely to occur during the landing phase. Say you're
approach, for some reason you're already stepping on the rudder, student
pulls to "stretch" the glide. A wing is more likely to drop upon
stalling... (spin) and recovery is a matter of luck. Else, it might turn
into something like a "under the bottom stall". Nasty stuff... Spin
training to me, means "awareness" to such thing. Not necessarily a
guarantee that low altitude cross-control stalls can be recovered without
ending in a "under the bottom stall" or if slipping, in a "over the top
stall" But, if well trained, I believe that with some quick instincts and
luck, recovery may be possible.
Brent
2011-04-04 11:19:44 UTC
Permalink
That is one of the funniest and strangest differences between canadian and
american flight training

It is a required demonstration for Canadian private pilots and a canadian
flight school cannot be licensed and operate unless it has at least one
aircraft certified for intentional spins. Canadian commercial pilots are
required to recover from an incipient spin as part of fligh training. (In
the last year Canada has shifted the focus from spin excecution to pure
recovery in the incipient phase)

Spins spend altitude like ther is no tomorrow and to my pleasure the biggest
thing i learned from round 2 (insurance signoff of my plane) in the cherokee
140 is just how MUCH it takes to make it spin. In order to spin the plane i
essentially had to throw it out of the sky sideways with a full stomp of
uncoordinated rudder. (mind you it recovers in an almost vertical attitude
requiring swift action)
Post by Dimitri P.
Post by vaughn
As a student pilot, I insisted on pre-solo spin training. If I ever screwed up
enough to get myself into an inadvertent spin, I did not want to be required to
figure out spin recovery for myself!
well said. Especially figuring out spin recovery during short final,
where they are more likely to occur! I was fortunate enough to be part of
the student pilots where spin training was mandatory in Canada in 1999.
D***@yahoo.com
2011-04-21 02:07:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brent
That is one of the funniest and strangest differences between canadian and
american flight training
It is a required demonstration for Canadian private pilots and a canadian
flight school cannot be licensed and operate unless it has at least one
aircraft certified for intentional spins. Canadian commercial pilots are
required to recover from an incipient spin as part of fligh training. (In
the last year Canada has shifted the focus from spin excecution to pure
recovery in the incipient phase)
Spins spend altitude like ther is no tomorrow and to my pleasure the biggest
thing i learned from round 2 (insurance signoff of my plane) in the cherokee
140 is just how MUCH it takes to make it spin. In order to spin the plane i
essentially had to throw it out of the sky sideways with a full stomp of
uncoordinated rudder. (mind you it recovers in an almost vertical attitude
requiring swift action)
As a student pilot, I insisted on pre-solo spin training.  If I ever
screwed up
enough to get myself into an inadvertent spin, I did not want to be required to
figure out spin recovery for myself!
well said.  Especially figuring out spin recovery during short final,
where they are more likely to occur!  I was fortunate enough to be part of
the student pilots where spin training was mandatory in Canada in 1999.
We have a Redbird. About $100 per hour. In Canada we can do up to
half of the 40 hours IFR training in a sim, even if it's multi, and
since the Seneca plus instructor is well over $300/hour, the Redbird
does it far cheaper and we don't have to have flyable weather and the
Redbird is never off line for maintenance. The motion is minimal, but
it's enough to create vertigo and the student learns to trust the
instruments instead of his sense of balance. We also do the first few
hours of ab initio in it, saving the student several hundred bucks on
the Private. Much of the first few hours is just spent learning how to
start, taxi, make radio calls; stuff that happens on the ground but
still costs the full rental rate. Again, Redbird is cheaper and it can
be paused to explain something. Hard to do that with the real
airplane.

Spin training in Canada is done to teach not only recovery but the
various scenarios that lead to it. If one never experiences a spin,
it's all theoretical. Once a student has been into a spin out of a
skidding descending turn, he never skids that base-to-final turn
again. Ever. And he learns that trying to raise the dropping wing with
aileron is stupid. Spins are safe if taught properly. They don't
overstress the airplane at all. And they're not taught at 500 feet.
Spins are like taildraggers: they need to be experienced. There's no
other way to get clear of the fear of such stuff.


Dan

Morgans
2010-07-06 00:31:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Vic Baron
Perhaps a CFI will chime in here but IIRC, they do NOT teach spin recovery
any longer in the US or at least, it is not required.
It isn't hard to find an old timer instructor who teaches spins and
recoveries in the course of their normal training routine. If you (anyone
out there) don't have such a person, ask around; I'll bet someone knows some
CFI in the area who will be happy to run you through a few spin cycles.
--
Jim in NC
Peter Dohm
2010-07-06 01:43:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Morgans
Post by Vic Baron
Perhaps a CFI will chime in here but IIRC, they do NOT teach spin
recovery any longer in the US or at least, it is not required.
It isn't hard to find an old timer instructor who teaches spins and
recoveries in the course of their normal training routine. If you (anyone
out there) don't have such a person, ask around; I'll bet someone knows
some CFI in the area who will be happy to run you through a few spin
cycles.
--
Jim in NC
That was certainly true in my area the last time I looked around.

Peter
Peter Dohm
2010-07-06 01:52:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Ash
In article
Post by a
The reality is, use would have to be pretty high, for 2000 hour rental
years -- that's 40 hours a week, the device alone would have to earn
$10 an hour for a 3 year payback, and that contributes nothing for
space and instruction time. A more realistic use rate might be 500
hours a year, device charges $40 an hour for a 3 year payback (more or
less a 30% ROI, not a bad target for high risk ventures). I think I'll
keep my checkbook unopened.
For things where the simulator is just as good or better than a real
plane (practicing instrument procedures?) then $40/hour is a great rate.
But still somewhat hefty....
Post by a
On the other hand, there are things I'd like to do in my airplane and
would happily pay a few hundred dollars to try them in a realistic
simulator.
Oh yes. I'd easily pay WAY more than what I pay for actual flight time
to practice takeoff aborts at difficult altitudes in a simulator good
enough for the experience to translate into reality.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
That's a pretty good example of one of the good uses of a sim for emergency
procedures.

I used to be an advocate for true motion, almost to the point of bigotry,
after having the oportunity to try one for a few minutes years ago; but I've
since come to doubt the need for any more motion than the old link trainers
could provide--as far as I have been told, they could jostle around more
than enough to simulate turbulence and almost certainly helped to win the
war with far fewer casualties than might have otherwise been the case.

Peter
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe
2010-07-06 01:08:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Ash
Hmmm, $58,800.... For that much, I could buy my glider outright (no
partnership) and pay for about 8 years of flying it. I think I'll
pass....
That wouldn't quite pay for my airplane three times over.

And for all that it's only "surprisingly close in most regards"...

Pass.
--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate.
Dude
2010-07-05 05:27:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Whats funny is that a lot of DIY guys who are good with computers and
carpentry have made their own 1/2 cockpit Sims (not full motion of
course) and did it relatively inexpensive in comparison.
Did you notice the King Schools is going to be selling them.

Cheers,
Chris
Bob - Copter Six
2010-07-05 06:24:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dude
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Whats funny is that a lot of DIY guys who are good with computers and
carpentry have made their own 1/2 cockpit Sims (not full motion of
course) and did it relatively inexpensive in comparison.
Did you notice the King Schools is going to be selling them.
Cheers,
Chris
I saw nothing about being able to simulate helicopters in that thing.
Now that would make it more interesting.
--
____^____
===========================
boB Copter Six
Central Texas KGRK
DCA 1720 QB Norfolk
HC779WA
===========================
____<>____
<>
TOCA
2010-07-05 13:49:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dude
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Whats funny is that a lot of DIY guys who are good with computers and
carpentry have made their own 1/2 cockpit Sims (not full motion of
course) and did it relatively inexpensive in comparison.
Did you notice the King Schools is going to be selling them.
Cheers,
Chris
I saw nothing about being able to simulate helicopters in that thing. Now
that would make it more interesting.
--
For an extra $20.000 it will ;o)

Heck I'm in the wrong business :o/

Tommy C, Denmark
Bob - Copter Six
2010-07-05 21:46:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by TOCA
Post by Bob - Copter Six
Post by Dude
Post by Mxsmanic
See
http://www.flyingmag.com/safety/training/redbird-flight-simulations
Whats funny is that a lot of DIY guys who are good with computers and
carpentry have made their own 1/2 cockpit Sims (not full motion of
course) and did it relatively inexpensive in comparison.
Did you notice the King Schools is going to be selling them.
Cheers,
Chris
I saw nothing about being able to simulate helicopters in that thing.
Now that would make it more interesting.
--
For an extra $20.000 it will ;o)
Heck I'm in the wrong business :o/
Tommy C, Denmark
Me Too ..... I could set up a helicopter simulator (Blackhawk, OH58D
and AH64) and make some money from all the pilots on Ft Hood that want
to brush up and/or get ready for their annual instrument and/or
Proficiency check ride. I don't know how it would go over with civilian
pilots/students around here.
--
____^____
===========================
boB Copter Six
Central Texas KGRK
DCA 1720 QB Norfolk
HC779WA
===========================
____<>____
<>
Loading...