PDA

View Full Version : So you want fully realistic start up procedure huh..?



Bearcat99
09-17-2006, 04:52 PM
WW2 Training Videos (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=WW2+Training+Film)

While it would be nice as an option for the diehard realism junkies.. I can see this being a major hassle online as people stall out because they dont have enough power.. or screw up thier engines... or just tale forever to get it all together.

Bearcat99
09-17-2006, 04:52 PM
WW2 Training Videos (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=WW2+Training+Film)

While it would be nice as an option for the diehard realism junkies.. I can see this being a major hassle online as people stall out because they dont have enough power.. or screw up thier engines... or just tale forever to get it all together.

LStarosta
09-17-2006, 04:56 PM
Or they could suck it up and learn to go through what every real pilot has to go through.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Nice stuff there.

F6_Ace
09-17-2006, 04:59 PM
In answer to the subject, no...I don't.

It will be tedious and just a novelty.

vocatx
09-17-2006, 05:10 PM
I would definitely like to see a much more complex system of engine management than what we have now, but I'm willing to compromise. I can understand how it might turn some folks off to have "full real" engine management.

F19_Orheim
09-17-2006, 05:13 PM
make it optional, the end

smatchimo
09-17-2006, 05:13 PM
Hopefuly it would be an option,just as it is in falcon 4. Its fun to do every once in a while, but would be extremely tedious to have to repeat over and over.
And offline it would be a good way to filter out the "rambo" style. Players would want to keep their a/c in one piece in order to avoid the procedure again.
But in the end I dont see any real need for it.

,just my 2 cents

cheers!

mrsiCkstar
09-17-2006, 05:36 PM
Thanks for posting BearCat! I loved the F4U vid http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

gonna take notes from that and see if I can apply them in the sim...

To be honest that start up procedure doesn't look too bad, coming from Falcon where a rampstart will take you a good 12 minutes that doesn't seem overly difficult... a couple of keybinds and there it is...

Bearcat99
09-17-2006, 05:37 PM
Note the 3 radiators..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

StellarRat
09-17-2006, 05:48 PM
What a pain in the A$%. I think it's fine the way it is... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif If my car took that much BS to drive I'd probably consider the bus.

partic_3
09-17-2006, 05:52 PM
Remember, weigh one thing against the other. How long will it take to code all this for each plane? What other coding could they do in that time? Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with people expressing their wishes but do always bear in mind that this is a commercial enterprise. So it is right for Oleg's team to spend their time coding the things that will help sell the game/sim.

Rjel
09-17-2006, 06:25 PM
One thing I've noticed repeatedly on "Full Real" servers are people taking off from the taxi ways or even just firing up and flying straight off the apron. So much for full real.........

I doubt most would want more complexity.

Longpo
09-17-2006, 06:26 PM
I like the way you start aircraft in BoB:Wov, nothing overly complicated but more fun than just pressing "I".

Waldo.Pepper
09-17-2006, 06:32 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F19_Orheim:
make it optional, the end </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sensible words from a sensible man. I agree. +1.

I would like it.

FlatSpinMan
09-17-2006, 06:45 PM
Nope. I really wouldn't. It's a flight sim, not a flicking switches sim.

LStarosta
09-17-2006, 06:49 PM
Umm, without knowing how to operate that powerplant, you wouldn't have "flight".

Make it optional so the real McCoys can use it, and so the throttle jammers can enjoy the game too.

WskyStr8
09-17-2006, 06:54 PM
I think you can overdo the realism thing but it'd be ok as player selectable option not a server setting.

LEXX_Luthor
09-17-2006, 08:24 PM
smatch:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Hopefuly it would be an option,just as it is in falcon 4.
:
: </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
When modelling only one (1) Flyable aircraft, its a good idea. Hehe the Startup is Optional, but the F-16 is not. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
:
:
But in the end I dont see any real need for it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Mee Too.

Targ
09-17-2006, 09:22 PM
No big deal really, if you fly multi engine aircraft in the sim you do much of that anyways. I would enjoy the start up routine as the regimented ritual of it appeals to me.

leitmotiv
09-17-2006, 10:09 PM
Concur, Targ---once you get used to it, it is second nature. I do it all the time with WWII-era warplanes in FS2004. In retrospect, it was far far far harder for me to learn to fly with Oleg's FM than to learn to manage engines---I smashed myself all over the virtual landscape for months before everything came reasonably together.

sudoku1941
09-17-2006, 10:18 PM
Once again, I feel it's the necessity of it being tied to relevant operations and combat that's the key.

In the air, yes, you should have complex engine management because it has to do with your plane's range, performance, fighting trim... and with your alertness and situational awareness.

On the ground, what difference does it make if you "jiggle the fuel pump" or trip a few magneto switches? There's where that level of detail is not really needed. Especially considering you don't have grounds crew actually pumping fuel into your plane, you don't actually do a "walkaround" to check that every single system is in working order, you don't actually have to "sign the plane out" from the crew chief, etc., etc. For a simulation of aerial combat, that's as irrelevant as which tunic you happen to be wearing.

Tater-SW-
09-17-2006, 10:45 PM
Depending on the date in the war, the service you were in, where the field was, the quality of the base, etc, start up might be getting in the already started and warmed up aircraft since your crew chief would have done it for you. Any attempt at realistic starting would have to take this into account---some pilots didn't have to, someone did it for them.

Also, what about warm up?

If it wasn't terribly difficult to add, wtf, do it and have a switch to toggle it. Otherwise, it strikes me as a massive waste of effort.

tater

carguy_
09-18-2006, 01:00 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F19_Orheim:
make it optional, the end </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes,that is the best answer.I think it would be too much for me,maybe eventually I`d get it remembered in the 109.

Actually what I see online is ppl having SERIOUS problems with taking off the Me262.Can`t possibly imagine the havoc with everyone trying to figure out why doesn`t their plane want to roll. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

La7_brook
09-18-2006, 01:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Rjel:
One thing I've noticed repeatedly on "Full Real" servers are people taking off from the taxi ways or even just firing up and flying straight off the apron. So much for full real.........

I doubt most would want more complexity. </div></BLOCKQUOTE> taking off on taxi ways yes because we have landings on run way , with alot of planes in and out, in a combat server things get a littte busy , its call order , most know how it works and it works well , most bases are small

woofiedog
09-18-2006, 01:43 AM
As they were showing the F4U getting ready for takeoff... it was moving side to side as it taxied along.

They said it was for a better view... I'm always going side to side down the field in any of these crate's before takeoff and after landing.

But now I can say... it's for a Better View of the airfield! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

WOLFMondo
09-18-2006, 02:28 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F19_Orheim:
make it optional, the end </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

+1

The-Pizza-Man
09-18-2006, 02:49 AM
It doesn't have to be 100% realistic, although I won't complain if it is, but something along the lines of setting the appropriate pitch, mixture and so on. The same sort of stuff you should have to do in flight. But yeah, priming the oil lines is a bit excessive.

slipBall
09-18-2006, 03:11 AM
I would like it, would add alot to the sim. Many of us fly msfs, and enjoy the check list style. As said above, would be best, as a option

Black Sheep
09-18-2006, 05:07 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Waldo.Pepper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by F19_Orheim:
make it optional, the end </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sensible words from a sensible man. I agree. +1.

I would like it. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, says all that needs to be said.

Personally, I'd like it but can understand why others wouldn't.

GBrutus
09-18-2006, 05:18 AM
Definately make it optional. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

SeaFireLIV
09-18-2006, 05:25 AM
Like F19_Orheim said, make it OPTIONAL.

I might not use a totally realistic start-up everytime, but I`d definitely use it quite frequently. I love learning how a plane really works.

When I first started flying flight sims (20 years ago), I thought it was the same as REAL aircarft. So when I only needed to press ONE button and the engine started, that`s how I thought it was in real life. When I flew about without any need to trim or watch for stalls or buffeting, I thought that`s how it was in real life - I thought WWII aircraft flew like on rails! When I flew in Spits against 109s or F4s against Zeros I always thought that 109s and Zeros were worthless pieces of **** because the Allied planes always blew them away with ease!

Well it said FLIGHT SIMULATION on the box, should it not be so? That`s why I bought it.

Surely a flight simulater should simulate reality? But no, they didn`t. It wasn`t until IL2 that I actually faced German planes that gave my allied *** a good kicking, then started reading up about it, cos I couldn`t believe Jerry planes could be so effective and realised that flight sims of yore were really very biased and inaccurate.

Anyway, I digress (no kidding?).

F16 Allied Force has got to have one of the most authentic start-ups in the history of TRUE flight sims. First time I managed it, it took me nearly 40 minutes!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

For realistic WWII start-up, Bearcat99, look at BOBwov, that has a good start-up that`s not TOTALLY realistic, but gives you a few moments to actually manually start the engine. When you first manage to do a manual start-up, it`s like waking a sleeping Lion from its slumber all by yourself and it feels great.

Henkie_
09-18-2006, 06:30 AM
I wouldn't like fully realistic start up procedure for many reasons.

I think even for a sim like upcoming BoB with a more limited planeset it would already take too much time and effort to model every other switch and handle and lever. Let alone if the planeset expanded.

And if it were made an option, then people would try it maybe 1 or 2 times but the majority would turn off the option at least on dogfight servers. A lot of effort then went into something that most of us will never even use anyway. IMO that effort could have been better spent for things a lot more important.

And we must not forget that all those startup functions added must be tied to a command key as well. This startup sequence is already simulated enough with the I key, we already assume now that our virtual pilot is already trained enough to go through the usual start up procedure without thinking twice about it.

so for me thx but no thx http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

OD_79
09-18-2006, 06:33 AM
I'm well up for it being an option. Having done proper flight checks for real on a regular basis it's not that hard, and once you know them you can reel them off quickly and get under way.

OD.

PBNA-Boosher
09-18-2006, 06:53 AM
before we can get into full real engine management it would probably be better to get every gauge working in every flyable plane we have.

jasonbirder
09-18-2006, 06:56 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">And if it were made an option, then people would try it maybe 1 or 2 times but the majority would turn off the option at least on dogfight servers </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Don't forget there is a world away from dogfight servers...despite what many would have you believe http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I remember when the realistic start up sequence was added to Falcon4...I thought it was awesome and ALWAYS went for a ramp start - even when I was in the middle of a tough campaign...

After all i'm playing a Flight Simulator I Want it to simulate what a real Fighter Pilot has to do...

I think that FB/AEP/PF does a creditable job of simulating dogfighting...but a relatively poor fist of simulating everything else associated with World War II Aerial Combat...Navigation, Fuel management, Engine Management, Instrument Flying...everything seems to take second place to the all mighty dogfight...which statistically speaking was tremendously rare....the overwhelming majority of kills in World War II wer zero deflection shots at unsuspecting targets...

And I believe the fact that FB/AEP/PF does relatively speaking such a poor job of simulating everything away from the moments spent in a "Furball" are what makes it so hard to feel truly "immersed"
I'd love to see all of the following added to BOB-SOW
Proper Engine Management
Proper Fuel Management
Random system Failures
"Cascading" Damage
Realistic Radio Chatter
Realistic navigation
Larger Formations
Don't you think that the addition of these on top of what we already have would make a better simulation, rather than jsut adding more and more polygons to the already beautiful aircraft models.

WB_Outlaw
09-18-2006, 07:06 AM
Geez some of y'all make it sound like there are 200 steps to a start-up. It's not that complicated and like OD said, after you do it a few times, it's becomes second nature. Depending on the level of damage/failure modeling some of them can be skipped as they are for safety only. If you don't model electrical fires, why turn off the battery? If you don't model gyro drift why cage it? If you don't model overboost, why open the turbo wastegate and/or bypass?

With logical key mappings even the most complicated startup procedure will take, at most, a few seconds. With programmable sticks, you could put it on one button.

The only thing I would leave out is priming the engine (that's fuel, not oil) as it's done somewhat by feel and is more than just a simple switch or lever position.

Following the shutdown procedure is much more important than the startup procedure anyway as you can easily damage the engine or make it very difficult to start by skipping steps (oil dilution, mixture to idle cutoff, etc.).

I long for the day when my engine start procedure includes "energize" and "engage" coupled with the beautiful sound of the flywheel spinning up. (Note that the above has nothing to do with Star Trek so all of you dateless wonders keep your mouths shut! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ).

--Outlaw.

Henkie_
09-18-2006, 07:13 AM
We would all like to see those things ofcourse, but there's only so much you can do with a given budget and time. You can't have everything.

Besides f4 is a sim with the same plane for everyone. So you only have to model the startup sequence once.

Not exactly in the same league as a sim with at least more than 1 flyable with a big probability of an ever expanding planeset. Think of how much work would go into modelling all those different start up sequences.

Any combat flight sim is more directed towards players who like the aircombat part, blowing up stuff, fast action even for those very short periods of time.

For people who just like to fly from A to B there is already MSFS.
BTW

if it's not that difficult and becomes second nature very quickly, then the whole starting sequence is perfectly simulated by the I key.http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LStarosta
09-18-2006, 07:21 AM
Umm, I'm kind of afraid of the comments people have about "do it a few times and it's second nature".

That's when people make mistakes that sometimes cost them their lives.

Please, think of the kittens and use a check list.

Therion_Prime
09-18-2006, 07:22 AM
I'd use it and I would prefer a clickable cockpit too.

I always did a ramp start in Falcon4AF and I liked it. It's a simulation and not a semi arcade game like IL2 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif .

At least make a power switch this time, I hate it when you landed in IL2 and just have to press "I" to shut off the engine. I always turn off the magnetos instead and a final push of the "main power" switch would be the icing on the cake.


Maybe some of you know the payware addon "Realair Spitfire" for FS2004 (http://www.realairsimulations.com/products/spitfire/index.php). It has a really nice but easy startup-sequence in a beautifully done clickable cockpit:

IIRC:
-Close door
-Close canopy
-Master switch ON
-Positionlights ON (note: works only after masterswitch on as it should be)
-Magnetos 1+2 ON
-Fuel **** ON (damn, this board doesn't allow me to type C*O*C*K)
-Mixture FULL
-Proppitch FULL
-Throttle IDLE
-Boostpump ON
-Carb intake in filter setting
-Manual fuelpump: pump a few times
-Starter: ON
-Check Trims idle
-Parking brake OFF

That's it. It can be done in less then 15 seconds but gives a great feeling of satisfaction when the Engine starts (with gutshaking sounds recorded from a real Spit *cough*).
In addition, the Realair Spit has a fueltank selector switch - a feature that I always missed in IL2.

OD_79
09-18-2006, 07:27 AM
Speaking from experience, when you have done the same checklist a few hundred times you know the routine, you know what needs checking and it is second nature.
I was doing my gliding scholarship with the RAF flying Grob G109B Vigilant Motor Gliders and the instructors knew the checklist and could fly through it, by the time I had come to do my instructor training I could to. Your hands know where to go, which switches to flick, your eyes instantly go to the right gauges and you can be moving in a minute or so, compared to five minutes when you're a new starter.
Get into a conventional glider and it is even easier! Turn on Radio, check altimeter, a few other gauges (it's been a while and I didn't do it as much).
So once you get it onto a PC it's just a question of hitting the right keys and opening the throttle a bit and off you go.

OD.

LStarosta
09-18-2006, 07:29 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by OD_79:
Speaking from experience, when you have done the same checklist a few hundred times you know the routine, you know what needs checking and it is second nature.
I was doing my gliding scholarship with the RAF flying Grob G109B Vigilant Motor Gliders and the instructors knew the checklist and could fly through it, by the time I had come to do my instructor training I could to. Your hands know where to go, which switches to flick, your eyes instantly go to the right gauges and you can be moving in a minute or so, compared to five minutes when you're a new starter.
Get into a conventional glider and it is even easier! Turn on Radio, check altimeter, a few other gauges (it's been a while and I didn't do it as much).
So once you get it onto a PC it's just a question of hitting the right keys and opening the throttle a bit and off you go.

OD. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As a freight loader and frequent right-seater, I fly with pilots who have thousands of hours total time, including at least a couple hundred hours in the particular aircraft they are flying, and they ALWAYS use a check list.

It's like a seat belt. You'd be nuts not to use one.

But alas, this is just a game we're talking about. I doubt Oleg's engine models will even be that specific and high fidelity, though I'd love to be proven wrong.

Henkie_
09-18-2006, 07:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by OD_79:
Speaking from experience, when you have done the same checklist a few hundred times you know the routine, you know what needs checking and it is second nature.
I was doing my gliding scholarship with the RAF flying Grob G109B Vigilant Motor Gliders and the instructors knew the checklist and could fly through it, by the time I had come to do my instructor training I could to. Your hands know where to go, which switches to flick, your eyes instantly go to the right gauges and you can be moving in a minute or so, compared to five minutes when you're a new starter.
Get into a conventional glider and it is even easier! Turn on Radio, check altimeter, a few other gauges (it's been a while and I didn't do it as much).
So once you get it onto a PC it's just a question of hitting the right keys and opening the throttle a bit and off you go.

OD. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

exactly

but that's also exactly why the I key already perfectly simulates the starting sequence. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

you press that one also without thinking about it twice.

han freak solo
09-18-2006, 07:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LStarosta:
Please, think of the kittens and use a check list. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Meow. Meow. Meow.

Translation = Please use checklist.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Tater-SW-
09-18-2006, 07:38 AM
^^^ How long do you have to let it warm up, then? 10-15 minutes, maybe more if you are flying out of someplace really cold, right?

If you have to set everything just so, then you also have to sit there while the engine warms up, a realistic start proceedure is only as realistic as the least realistic part of it.

Regardless, in a real spitfire, would the pilot start her up, or would he climb into a started and warmed up aircraft? If the answer is yes, that is what a realistic start should look like, you get into a plane already started.

For the USN, the plane would always have been started by the crew chief. IJN planes would have been started and warmed up below in the hanger.

My big issue would probably be online. I guarantee, once there is such a proceedure---even if it unrealistically allows you to take off cold, or forces you to start a plane that should have been started for you by ground crew---many of the "full switch" servers will require it. The problem is as I said, that it would in many cases not be realistic for the pilot to have to bother.

tater

LStarosta
09-18-2006, 07:43 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
IJN planes would have been started and warmed up below in the hanger.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's why they lost the war. They were toking on exhaust fumes too much to remember that the final step to a successful strafing or dive bombing run is to pull up.

OD_79
09-18-2006, 07:51 AM
you can't start a Spit or Hurricane on the gorund without the ground crew, they had no starter motor, they had to use the starter trolleys.
As for starting up and taking 15 minutes, even in the cold it didn't take that long! lol. In the really cold you just changed the choke settings and stuck a bit more power in.
The Typhoon had the infamous cartrige starter which if you weren't careful could blow up in your face! Now that would be good to have modelled! (same for the Tempest). I think the Ju-87 had to be hand cranked.
But overall I am happy enough pressing I and getting on with it, but if you want a proper flight then by all means have the option of the checklist and the proper procedures.

OD.

han freak solo
09-18-2006, 07:59 AM
Finally watched the vid.

Nice link there Mr. BC.

Vanderstok
09-18-2006, 10:40 AM
Starts from hanger is already possible in IL2, see this:

http://mission4today.com/index.php?name=Downloads&file=details&id=1262

You will not use it much I guess. It will be fun however to be able to start a plane anywhere in a mission...

slipBall
09-18-2006, 10:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by OD_79:
you can't start a Spit or Hurricane on the gorund without the ground crew, they had no starter motor, they had to use the starter trolleys.
As for starting up and taking 15 minutes, even in the cold it didn't take that long! lol. In the really cold you just changed the choke settings and stuck a bit more power in.
The Typhoon had the infamous cartrige starter which if you weren't careful could blow up in your face! Now that would be good to have modelled! (same for the Tempest). I think the Ju-87 had to be hand cranked.
But overall I am happy enough pressing I and getting on with it, but if you want a proper flight then by all means have the option of the checklist and the proper procedures.

OD. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Now the charge starter would be cool. Anyone see the old movie, "Rise of the Phoenix" staring Jimmy Stewart,(they were down to their last cartridge I think).....I did not see the recent remake...but the original was a very cool movie, one of my favorites

Just a tempory hijack Bearcat http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

trumper
09-18-2006, 11:43 AM
I like the start up procedures in BoB11 WOV and i think the option SHOULD be there,if you want it turn it on if not leave it alone.
Sometimes it is nice just to start up ,do everything right and fly about,flight is fun you don't need to fight all the time.

p-11.cAce
09-18-2006, 12:50 PM
I like the "full switch" startup in Falcon4.0AF, but I don't use it all the time (at 8 minutes+ it can be tedious). However I think it would be fun to have the option to incorporate some of the steps into the start procedure.

Worf101
09-18-2006, 01:37 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by woofiedog:
As they were showing the F4U getting ready for takeoff... it was moving side to side as it taxied along.

They said it was for a better view... I'm always going side to side down the field in any of these crate's before takeoff and after landing.

But now I can say... it's for a Better View of the airfield! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Hey!!!! I resemble that remark. Locking tail wheel doesn't help me either... I'm all over the figgin place... Help!!!!

Da Worfster