Matt Ford in the New York Times

an article on Matt Ford.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...=&pagewanted=1

Thank you Rodney for bringing the New York Times article to our attention.

Actually very nice, but it's too bad the folks interviewed forgot to mention the thousands of other talented builders, like we have here.

Look at our builders of the month and the accomplishment they've made, with their bare hands and parts made from scratch.

I'm sorry if I sound a bit bitter, but I have a tremendous amount of respect and admirations for those builders who have worked so hard to accomplish building their dream. Those same builders are the ones that keep coming back to help others who are starting to build their dream cockpit. I, as my fellow builders appreciate those who do that, and they to should be recognized.

I supposed that's why we have builders of the month. :)

So for those that have been forgotten by the NYT, I thank you and congratulate you, in my book you have not been forgotten.

Matt Olieman

Well, back in 2003, there weren't as many of us then as now.

This is old. I remember reading it some time ago, but after it was published.

Still a good article to let the outsiders and desktoppers know what we're doing. Half of them probably think we're nuts and the other half wish they could build what we have.

Oops, thought it was a recent article.

I still stand by what I said, and appreciate our current fellow builders, tremendously!!!! :) :) :)

Matt O.

It was from 2003, reprinted today. So it says something about us all. Matt Ford was one of the original builders and the 1st I think to use a real shell. But look where we all are today, and the amount of vendors that support our addiction. Wondurful ain't it?

Yes he was, and James Price was one of his inspirations and definitely mine.

James Price started his project or at least picked up his B737 Nose section on June 10, 2000. There were a few other projects similar to his, but not to it's magnitude. Imagine, you could of counted the number of projects in the world on your right hand.

Check out James Price web site, see if you recognize any of the names who participated in his fabulous project. Particularly when the only interface available was EPIC.

http://www.737simguy.com/index.htm

I thank James Price for starting it all :) :) :) As far as I'm concerned James Price will go down in history as one of thee pioneers of our hobby.

Matt Olieman

It's almost unfortunate that there are so many types of aircraft to build. It makes it impossible for a vendor to cater to everyone and still make a buck. For a 737 an illuminated start panel might sell for $35-50 bucks because everyone wants one. The same panel (and three different varieties I might add) for the 727 (DC-8, L-1011, fill-in-the-blank) might be twice as much (if even offered to build a one-off) than for something everyone wants.

I only say this (and you knew it was coming) because not one vendor in the whole simulator world supports the 727. Now, with all due regard, Northern Flight Sim will rebuild you a 727 major component like a throttle quadrant, but it's not like you can ring up a supplier and ask for any sort of panel for an early Boeing. And that goes for Lockheed and McDonnell Douglas as well.

I guess I don't understand the attraction of the latest and greatest by all of the manufacturers, while at the same time, if these parts were offered, if even for a short time, more would be interested in building the older aircraft.

It's probably a catch 22 situation though. No one offers the product, so no one builds it. No one builds it because not enough ask for it.

I hate to say it for the sake of the aircraft, but I guess it's a good thing for sim builders that so many of the older birds are being scrapped.

I love using real parts, I really do. But the build would be so much easier with aftermarket third party equipment. Most of us using real parts have more of a "real" aircraft simulator than most others if you get my drift.

Overall a good article, and I agree that it is at least a way for common people to hear about the industry.

However, two points stuck in my mind as interesting.

First of all, the notion that the systems are too complex for them to be used for terrorist purposes. That probably was the case in '03 but currently I believe that money talks and its very easy to just pay the cash and have a complete dual side 737ng cockpit delivered to your door. And the connections aren't that difficult with the high end software in the market today. And although its quite a bit of cash for the common builder, we all know what kind of budgets groups that might do this are working with.

Secondly, the Boeing company spokesman's comments about keeping an eye on the industry and guarding their intellectual property. I'm guessing this is aimed at the manufacturers and not the builders since companies are more interested in IP when someone else is making money off of their names/designs as opposed to using it in his/her own home for personal interest. So if one day Boeing decided to put the foot down and threaten all major Boeing cockpit manufacturers with legal action, where would we be? Would the industry start turning to generic designs that still represent the same functions as the Boeing aircraft people wanted to fly? Could this action also affect the software we use today which has Boeing airplanes and showcases their functions to great detail?

Anyway, this is starting to sound like a rant but its just a conversation piece. Something to think about... :D

When I first read it, I did not care for it. Now I find out it was written in '03 and I think it was OK for the time.

Alan, do you have a scar from that? That would be a real conversation peice...

Al, How did you get that scar?
Oh, a peice of my plane fell on my head in my garage...

Andy,

Yup, have a large scar on my head and on my arm.
When people ask me about it, my stock reply is.
"Oh, a Boeing hit me on the head".
When they mention they have not seen any recent crash on TV, I reply.
"Happened outside my garage, but I got the tail number"

I was reading our Swiss friend's comments.
Boeing's concern at the time was that non-regulated parts would make it into an airliner. There was a debacle at the time where cheap non-spec imitation bolts from the Orient (stamped with the appropriate head markings) were installed (in good faith) by FBO mechanics into general aviation aircraft causing bolt fractures that led to crankshaft and connecting rod failures in both Continental and Lycoming engines, resulting in a number of forced landings, before the FAA stepped in and took action.

Subsequently, regulation of parts (manufactured and refurbished) came under intense scrutiny. OEM parts I bought at the time came with a mountain of paper work (trace histories, etc).

I bought my flight deck in Feb 2002, a few months after Sept, 2001.
I did get a visit from the FBI. One of their agents is now a very good friend of mine. Attended his son's wedding.

Boeing has their hands full competing against Airbus Industrie and therefore has no current interest competing in the hobby market. Of course, I am not an official spokesperson for that company, but that is my two cents worth.

Regards,
Alan.