Springbok Virtual

A place to converse about the general aspects of flight simulation in New Zealand

Postby Springbok » Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:29 pm

Hi,
we are the Springbok Virtual, a virtual airline from Cape Town, South Africa.
Our hubs are Cape Town and Windhoek, Namibia.
We want to show our pilots how wonderful Africa is.

Our Fleet:
2x Boeing 737-200
1x Lockheed L1011 TRISTAR
1x Airbus A310-300
1x Airbus A330-200
1x Embrear ERJ135

All aircrafts are leased

Springbok Virtual was founded on 26th June 2006.

We are flying from Cape Town to:
Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Belgium, UK, Ghana, Namibia, Botsuana, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Mozambique, Lesotho, Swaziland, South Africa, Mauritius, Madagascar, Germany, France, Thailand and Congo.

From Windhoek to:
South Africa, Austria, Switzerland

In future we want to expand more in Africa and offer more flights in our home country.

We are creating sceneries for public and our pilots, because we are offering a VFR-Flying in Namibia. With a Cessna 210 you can fly to many little airfields and we are creating sceneries for this airfields.
The biggest airport, Hosea Kusetako International Airport of Windhoek will be released soon.

user posted image

See you!
www.springbok.net.ms

Christoph Limm
Last edited by Springbok on Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Springbok
 

Postby Dreamweaver » Thu Jan 04, 2007 6:55 pm

Some one get a bit lost :P

I thought the island to the south of the south island was called Stewart Island <_<

Thanks for the info springbok, when you have routes in New Zealand then maybe I may be tempted to sign up until then its...................

:plane: >nzflag<
Dreamweaver
 

Postby Alex » Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:13 pm

Thats a very nice new site you've got there. :)

Alex
Alex
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 3:39 pm
Posts: 3620

Postby ZK-Brock » Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:34 pm

Looks like a great VA, but the appeal to many of us would be limited, as most of us fly in NZ. An NZ route from SA in a heavy might appeal ;)
ZK-Brock
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Sun Jul 23, 2006 3:35 pm
Posts: 2035

Postby Jimmy » Thu Jan 04, 2007 7:48 pm

hey looks kool!

I am interested in seeing other parts of the world so if you add a b763 ill sign up :D :D

James
Jimmy
 

Postby Springbok » Thu Jan 04, 2007 8:47 pm

Jimmy wrote: hey looks kool!

I am interested in seeing other parts of the world so if you add a b763 ill sign up :D :D

James

O yes, the 763 will come, two of them :plane:
Springbok
 

Postby Codge » Thu Jan 04, 2007 9:40 pm

Africa will become very popular as people move to FSX with all the animals to spot. I'll be flying through with the air race in 6 weeks or so, but we don't hang around and it could even be night! After that I'd love to check out the C210 stuff,
Thanks for posting, it's good to hear from other simmers from outside NZ. Increasing the FS gene pool is a breath of fresh air while we sit waiting, for Peter Lohr's Milford.
Congrats on being the 300th member. :clap:
2 wrongs don't make a right but 2 Wrights made an aeroplane!
User avatar
Codge
Forum Addict
 
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 11:04 pm
Posts: 355
Location: Dunedin

Postby Charl » Thu Jan 04, 2007 10:19 pm

Willkommen Christoph, wie geht's?
That just about exhausts my German unfortunately ;)
I've always thought there'd be room for a Great Circle flight Christchurch - Cape Town, how about getting yourselves a nice A340-500?
User avatar
Charl
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 8:28 am
Posts: 9691
Location: Auckland

Postby Codge » Fri Jan 05, 2007 12:46 am

Exactly, how else does the Super 14 work? I'm not big on rugby but flying cargo be it rugby players or livestock.
Now the tricky bit, the A340 is the 4 engine job is it? It needs to be that or the 747
because of the 90 minute rule that states you must be within 90mins of an airport if you only have two engines! They had the chance in 2004 to scrap it in light of modern reliability but they blew it, (ICAO) That rule has been around so long it is the very reason the tri jets were built.
Very few routes on the planet have to worry about it but Perth to Capetown is one of them, and only just. So if you want to keep it real no 767's allowed! :(
2 wrongs don't make a right but 2 Wrights made an aeroplane!
User avatar
Codge
Forum Addict
 
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 11:04 pm
Posts: 355
Location: Dunedin

Postby Dreamweaver » Fri Jan 05, 2007 6:41 am

because of the 90 minute rule that states you must be within 90mins of an airport if you only have two engines!


Fair Comment ;) Glad to see someone thinking like a simmer. To explain the rule better. The Boeing 767 must be able to land at a suitable Airport within 90 minutes if a engine fails. This effectively creates a circle of 90 minutes flying time around Airports capable of taking the Aircraft. On a Route these circles must overlap. There is a whole heap of information on this by searching the web if you want realism you find this stuff out about your Aircraft first.
Dreamweaver
 

Postby Charl » Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:31 am

The 767 was the pioneer of ETOPS operations.
In May 1985, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) approved 767s for long-range flights of up to 120 minutes from an alternate airport.
In March 1989, the FAA approved the 767 as the first jetliner for 180-minute extended twin-engine operation (ETOPS). This allows more direct, time-saving trans-Pacific and trans-Atlantic flights from many U.S. gateways.
The B777 is certified for 208 minutes ETOPS.
I believe there was a flurry when ANZ bought A320's and realised quite late in the process they weren't certified for the trans-Tasman trip!

Notwithstanding all the good Boeing work and excellent reliability of the modern turbine engine, I prefer to adopt Virgin Atlantic's slogan of 4engines4longhaul ;)
The A340 is a great passenger aircraft but nothing can touch the last 747's.
Last edited by Charl on Fri Jan 05, 2007 3:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Charl
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 8:28 am
Posts: 9691
Location: Auckland

Postby JonARNZ » Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:25 am

Or perhaps the new 748 once it flies in the next few years.
ARNZX flightsim.co.nz
Asus Sabretooth X79 MB | i73930K CPU | 8GB DDR3 1600 C7 Ram | GTX 560Ti DCII OC | Corsair H80 Water Cooling
User avatar
JonARNZ
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 12:49 pm
Posts: 1523
Location: Auckland

Postby brownbox » Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:03 am

i would be interested to fly, but im afraid I would just end up crashing all the planes ;)
Desktop:Core 2 Duo E4300 1.8@ 3.0Ghz@ 1.36v. 4Gb Supertalent DDR2-800 2.1v@ 5-5-5-15. Asus P5N-E SLI Pencil Modded. Corsair TX 650. 512MB Palit Geforce 8800GT. 2x200GB IDE+640GB SATAII. Windows Vista Ultimate X86. Samsung SH-S222A
Phone:Nokia N900 Vodafone
Car: 1993 Mitsubishi Mirage Asti Z. Steel Blue Pearl

1996 Toyota Curren 2.0L 5 Spd Manual Silver. 205/50/R16 on Enkei K-95. Lowered on Jamex Superlows. Remote locking. Remote boot release. Cruise control
1996 Mitsubishi GTO MR

Image
User avatar
brownbox
Senior Member
 
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 10:55 pm
Posts: 1318

Postby Haysie » Fri Jan 05, 2007 6:23 pm

Haha, says he who owns GTair :D
Haysie
 

Postby Codge » Fri Jan 05, 2007 8:39 pm

Well done guys, I stand corrected, about the 767 anyway. I remember reading somewhere about doing away with the rule for certain aircraft such as the 767, back in 2004 but the beaurecrats bungled the disscussions and a great opportunity was lost for god knows how long- 10 years maybe untill someone can get it back on the agenda.
This rule is incredibly wasteful of resources, particularly fuel and time. This is why planes fly in a 'track made good' instead of directly from A to B. This is not too much of an issue for the northern hemisphere travellers but us southern folks have these things to consider when going from NZ to South Africa and it's also why there is no service from NZ to South America direct, except for cargo. These cargo flights should have proved to the powers that be that engine fialures on these trips are extremely rare.
The jet engine is a wonderfully simple design compared to other engines and once they're going they don't stop easily, cutting the fuel is pretty much the only way.
Bird strikes are rare and usually not a big deal these days, birds just get minced and the engine keeps going.
I would say the biggest danger lies with the airline maintenance policies and operations where parts are not replaced when they should be, small cracks on compressor blades grow and the engine flies to bits because the paper work was fiddled with. Remember a few years back when that Auckland helicopter maintenance place was selling time expired rotor blades to unsuspecting customers and people lost their lives, and those responsable kept on doing it, they finally get brought to justice and the main guy gets 8 years in prison! Incredible as it is, and this is godzone- NZ. 8 measly years,if I had lost a loved one as a result of this piece of f&*%^$ing S&*(^ I would want to see a youtube vid of them getting the same as Saddam! Only the principle went down I think, someone may know more, If so please enlighten, anyway these people knew they were killing people but the money was too great for them to care. I do recall how a pair of Huey blades were literally fished out of the scrap bin, bogged up,repainted and sold for $50,000 to a guy in Nelson.
I worked at a place that does maintenance for light aircraft and helo's, all piston powered stuff, and I made my own share of mistakes being a 16 year old idiot.
I used to be amazed at the level of trust I was given, after all I was a recent school leaver,green as hell but keen to learn and 3 hours logged at the Aeroclub 3 doors down. The chief engineer would ask me what I had done and I would tell him and he hardly ever checked my work! Such things as 'did you torque the spark plugs in and what setting?' How much oil did you put in that one and other important stuff like that!
I make sure the local boys at the petrol station down the road do what they're supposed to, how many times I've checked the petrol cap and been glad I did! as it was about to fall off! OK enough rambling, and back to what this post is about!
I personally am not a fan of 4 engines. Maybe my thinking is flawed,see what you think, 4 engines=4 things to go wrong. If one does it is dead weight. Back when you needed 4 engines for the required power this is understandable, but now with the B777 which is as long and looks pretty much the same size as a B747 has only 2 massive engines. It must be easier and cheaper to maintain 2 engines than 4, and lessen the chance of an operator wanting to cook the books in a very competitive industry where margins are very tight.
When I get a warrant for my car I can say to my mechanic,'can you let me do that ball joint next time?' and he'll say 'well is it just you driving this car?' and if it's not too bad he'll say alright then. And I did get the ball joint some weeks later and did both sides even though only one was bad and it was $55 per side! Economics plain and simple was why I asked my mechanic for a favour. Exactly the same thing goes on in the aircraft industry, I have seen it myself.
So with good old AirNZ having the Chinese do their maintenance on their 'Heavies' to cut costs does not make me want to fly with them! Life is cheap over there and the language barrier and corruption and such seems like a recipe for disaster.

Is there a 748 on the horizon? As far as I know they have no orders for the 747 only the freighter, maybe this has changed, it would have been 6 mths ago I read that by now.

Thanks for getting me up to speed on ETOPS you guys, it makes me glad I raised the matter, I nearly wasn't going to, in case it was thought I was being too PC.
Regards Stephen :thumbup:
2 wrongs don't make a right but 2 Wrights made an aeroplane!
User avatar
Codge
Forum Addict
 
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 11:04 pm
Posts: 355
Location: Dunedin

Postby AlisterC » Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:17 pm

Codge wrote: .... and it's also why there is no service from NZ to South America direct, except for cargo....

Only one that I know of though.. :)

Lan Airlines - LA 800
Depart: Auckland International Apt
Terminal: International
Departure Time: 17:25, Friday, 5 January 2007
Arrive: Santiago Arturo Merino Benitez (Chile)
Terminal: International
Arrival Time: 12:45, Friday, 5 January 2007
Stops: Non-Stop
Travel Time: 11hrs 20mins
Aircraft: 340 (Airbus Industrie A340)
Classes offered: First Business Economy
Last edited by AlisterC on Fri Jan 05, 2007 9:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
AlisterC
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:13 am
Posts: 2543
Location: Nelson, NZ

Postby Haysie » Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:41 pm

LanChile?
Haysie
 

Postby Charl » Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:43 pm

Yes
And Aerolineas Argentinas are regulars too
User avatar
Charl
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 8:28 am
Posts: 9691
Location: Auckland

Postby flynz » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:15 pm

Last time I was up at auckland i saw all of the flight attendants standing outside a LAN flight and not one of them was a male which i found a little odd...
flynz
 

Postby Charl » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:25 pm

not one of them was a male

Ah the good old days!
Job adverts used to read something like:
AIR HOSTESS
Gorgeous single young ladies 5'6" - 5'9" aged 22-26 may apply for this glamorous job.
See the world!
Must be friendly, outgoing, but especially, open-minded.


Things are a little different these days...
No wonder I've come to hate long-haul flying
Last edited by Charl on Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Charl
NZFF Pro
 
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 8:28 am
Posts: 9691
Location: Auckland

Next

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests