Classic British Flight Sim

Hi Chris,

Chris Trott wrote:Sadly the 780 was never offered nor certified as a civilian aircraft thus it will not be accepted to the FlyNET database.

I guess the B52 has an exemption then .

In my opinion Chris, I think if ANY VA can come up with a valid reason to operate a military type on FlyNET then it's addition to the database should not be ruled out. It's a game and we're all here to have fun. I've got a few ideas lurking in the background and when/if I broach them to Konny I'm hoping they would be well received.

Chris Trott wrote: but we need a civilian cost to be able to set the price if it is to be added into the FlyNET database.

If someone was to request it's addition to the database, I'd pitch it at the same price as the regular 748 as it's comparable.



Rgds

John

RAF_Quantum wrote:I guess the B52 has an exemption then .

Nope, more of an abhorretion. Because one had already been bought when we finalized the rule (which was agreed upon by the vast majority of FlyNET users at the time), we allowed it to remain with some stipulations on its use and modifications to its data to make it prohibitve to operate by the only VA that flies it. It was also the primary reason for the "still built" field.

In my opinion Chris, I think if ANY VA can come up with a valid reason to operate a military type on FlyNET then it's addition to the database should not be ruled out. It's a game and we're all here to have fun. I've got a few ideas lurking in the background and when/if I broach them to Konny I'm hoping they would be well received.

Again John, this was a decision of the participants, Konny, and the DB Admins (there's 3 of us) to drop military-only aircraft as not in the spirit of FlyNET. That decision won't be reversed as Konny is the developer and he made the final ruling in support of the current rule. You can follow the discussion on the FlyNET forums if you like, but there were quite a few involved in the discussion and there was additional discussion you didn't see on the forum that came from e-mails between various members and e-mails to Konny over the issue.

If someone was to request it's addition to the database, I'd pitch it at the same price as the regular 748 as it's comparable.

I'd want to see some support for putting that number on it. If the cost of conversion plus purchase was less, then we need to put in that number.

Chris Trott wrote:Nope, more of an abhorretion.

A what, Chris? Any chance of a translation into English?
PP

Sorry, misspelled.

Aberration -

http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/a/aberrati.asp

Ah, I'm with you now. Thanks, Chris.
PP

Does Mr Trott have something to do with the way FlyNET is run?

He's one of the 3 database joc's Sean

ATB

DaveB :tab:

Hmmmm

The 748 is relatively straight forward... IF it was on the civil register in a few countries, and opperated civilian roles then there is no reason why it can't be added?

And to think at one time there was a thin dividing line beteeen altruism and self interest

Regards

Sean

Oh, and while I'm here, Mr Trott, for your information this planet revolves around the sun, not you. I don't give a monkey's if you think you know everything, but from what I can see you are a first class asshole. Only interested in getting people to think your way.. Take some advice, preside over your Green mountain Shitkicker VA, I'm sure there are some kids with odd shaped heads who play banjo's on the porch who would be interested in keeping you company.