> Does that estimated time enroute allow for:
>
>
> 1 Limited to 250 knots from 6268 ft to 10,000 ft after departure
> At 250kts the P-38 can climb at 2000 fpm
> 2 Reduced speed during remainder of climb
see above
>
> 3 Not cruising at 100% throttle so other planes can catch up with the
> lead plane instead of being strung out in a line so far apart the
> trailing plane can't even see the multiplayer tag for the lead plane
>
If takeoff spacing is right - shouldn't be a problem assuming the pilot knows how to get the max out of the a/c - should easily cruise at 325kts
> At 300 kt cruise speed that might take almost a full hour, not allowing
> the additional time between different planes takeoffs and landings.
>
About same as last flight - should take about an hour with no problems
> Is tha PRB waypoint part of a published approach? If a plane is flying
> VFR would there be any reason not to fly directly to CREPE from ROM? And
> if runway 29 is the active runway at KSBP wouldn't we substitute an
> intersection ESE of KSBP for CREPE too?
>
No, PRB was snuck in there to make it easier for tb to find his way <G>. For our flights, I am not concerned with the active rwy - time dictates we use 11.
> Is it normal in the real world to include aproach waypoints in the filed
> plight plan, or to refer to the onboard plates once the controler
> assigns the flight to an destination airport runway? With the new GPS
> units in FS 2004 we now have approach procedures available during
> flight, although I'm not sure to what extent the autopilot will respond
> to a procedure selected during the flight.
>
Might be fun to setup a flight sometime with the GPS but tb would have a problem.
I've set up approaches in flight on the GPS and the AP has handled it fine.
As I said, I don't care which one we fly -
Vic
-= VPC OffLine Reader 2.1 =-
Registered to: Vic Baron
-OLR.PL v1.83-