As close to Top Gun as it gets. Again.

As many of you know, aviation has been a huge part of my history.  And it just so happens I have a friend who owns - and sometimes flies - a cold war era F-104 Starfighter.

That's yours truly grinning like a 12-year old with a new toy.

I sure wish you could manually control exposure on the iPhone like a 'Droid.  Eh, whatya gonna do...

(Here's a link to a video shot a few years ago of us starting up this old bird:  http://youtu.be/vdDoKosn-88)

Anyway, we were out there again yesterday with another engine run-up, no flying unfortunately, not even a fast-taxi down the runway to fire up the afterburner.  But it was fun hearing the howl of that old J-79 engine and sitting the cockpit dreaming that one day we'll get this thing airborne again.

Here's the view forward from the front seat:

That's a P2 Neptune being used for fire-bombing sitting in front of us and.  You can see the long pitot tube with a tennis-ball on the end of it pointing at the red air compressor.

If cars were built was robustly as this 1960's fighter the only things that would wear out would be tires, brakes and rubber parts.  This thing is a tank with wings.

Microsoft Flight: Review

Many of you know that one of my passions is for flight, and one of my hobbies is playing Microsoft Flight Simulator X or, "FSX" as flight-simmers refer to it.

Back during the '08 recession (which we're still not out the woods from yet) Microsoft announced that the ACES Studio which created FS9 and FSX was being shut down.  Then a year later word came that another division of ACES was being revitalized and a new version of FSX was in the works.  Suffice it to say everyone in the flight-sim community was abuzz and waiting to see what MS would offer us.

As of February 29th the wait is over and we now have "Microsoft Flight" as the supposed FSX replacement.  I can sum up the review of this new sim with one word: Crap.

What MS has done to the venerable FSX platform is nothing short of despicable.  This new "Flight" simulation should have the word "simulation" stripped from it's genre, as this is much more game-like than a simulation.  So what's wrong with Microsoft Flight?  Here's a simple breakdown list of some of the most obvious problems:

1.  All that is available to fly around in is the Hawaiian Islands - and to get full access to all the areas and features you have to pay $60 bucks!   You can buy a "gold" copy of FSX (which now comes with the Acceleration pack built-in) for less than $30 dollars and you get THE ENTIRE PLANET!

2.  Only 2 aircraft readily available; a few others you have to purchase.  FSX planes are NOT compatible with this sim and there's no method to install third-party add-ons - yet.

3.  No tower view!!  Huh?

4.  You're forced to start off with "lessons" on how to fly one plane; to gain access to other planes/areas to have to pass more "lessons".

5.  Aircraft graphics seem to be OK, but terrain is just fair, even on high settings.  Add-on packs for FSX blow Flight away by a far margin.

I could go on with pages of rants about why this new sim really isn't a sim anymore, and die-hard FSX fans - and even student pilots will be severely disappointed in this new release from MS.

The king of the hill has been and still is FSX.  I seriously doubt MS will take notice of all the poor reviews MS Flight is getting and retool this game back into the King of Flight Simulation that it's been for decades, but for now if you're into FSX then stick with it.

On another related note:  Ikarus has created a new flight-sim of it's own, based around it's years of experience with radio-control PC-based trainers (they use the radio transmitter hooked up to your PC to control a virtual RC model).  It's called, Aerofly FS and while it's just been released in the EU it's not available in the USA just yet.  But, the graphics capabilities of this sim would easily outpace both FSX and MS Flight, so that's worth watching for.

HVX200 Color Test - Again!

Set the "Way Back" machine for 2005 after the venerable HVX200 hit the HD professional video market:

This was a camera test I created to show just how gorgeous the little Panasonic could look if you dug deep into camera settings to make it more "film like".

Obviously this camera has been succeeded by the HVX200A and HPX170 and of course the newer crop of AVCHD-based cameras such as the AF100 and F3 however, it still amazes me how good this "older" camera still makes images - and it's newer brother the HPX170 is even better.

And personally, I still prefer the P2 cams 422 color space and global shutter to any flavor of 4.2.0 AVCHD and it's associated rolling-shutter issues.

So while the HVX200 is old tech now, it's always good to know that any professional camera can be tweaked to create almost any "look", if you know what you're doing.

Enjoy this blast from the past:

Where's all the cool OSX Holiday Screen-savers?

Back in '08-'09 there was a flurry of new, advanced-animation 3D screen-savers for Mac OSX that hit  the 'net just before the holidays.

Since then, nothing new has really come out, in fact some of the oldies going back to OS 10.5 aren't around anymore.  Worse yet, many aren't compatible with OS 10.7 Lion!  Huh?

To date the best OSX Holiday-saver I've seen is "Snowmen" from Jason Sikes.  You can get your copy here:

http://www.neonzen.com/Downloads.html

If you know of any newer screen-savers for OSX that are this well-done and look this good, I'd love to hear about it!

Cheers, and Happy Holidays to all.

Canon's "big" Announcement: The C300 camcorder

As noted in a previous post about Canon's "big" announcement, it seems the rumor mill was spot-on this time.

Canon did indeed reveal a new HD camcorder system, the C300/PL.  Technically two different bodies with the latter offering a PL mount rather than Canon EOS type.

Unfortunately for Canon I can't help but feel they really missed the mark here.  This new camera only shoots an 8-bit MPEG2 long-GOP codec.  Yes, it's a 4:2:2 color space at 50Mbps, but it's still long-GOP using a CMOS chip which means the dreaded rolling shutter issue still exists.

And the price point is way off too, starting somewhere between $15 to $20K.  RED also just announced the long awaited Scarlet, which seems to do the same job but offers RAW capabilities and few other niceties the Canon doesn't - at half the price.

And to top it off, Canon makes mention of yet another DSLR that's supposed to have 4K HD video capabilities. (??)  Huh?  Why the hell didn't they put the 4K option in this new cinema-type camera body instead of a DSLR?  That just makes no sense.

Now if the Panasonic AF100 and the Sony F3 hadn't already hit the market - and if Scarlet wasn't an option - then Canon would surely have cornered the market on a truly game-changing digital-cinema camcorder.  But all they've accomplished is a slight tweaking on already shipping technology and put the Canon logo on it.  That's hardly game-changing and what's worse, there's really no value-add to this new offering.

Neither of these new cameras is shipping yet so the dust is far from being cleared out yet from this latest announcement, but personally for the money/capabilities the Canon is offering you'd be better off with either the Sony F3 or Scarlet.

Vincent LaForet, who almost single handedly showed the world what DSLR video was capable of, has a video review of his use of the new C300 but unfortunately it's quite obvious he was paid by Canon to use it for a new film and, to give a subsequent glowing review of the new toy.  So basically his supposedly unbiased "review" is easily debunked by the reality of what this new camera does and doesn't offer, and the fact that he's had his hands in Canon's pockets now for years also adds to the review being less than independent and without bias.

I really hate it when over-glossy marketing hype attempts to take over reality, something Apple has mastered for years, but clearly Canon has been drinking their own Kool-Aid and is now offering the public to share the drink.

Thanks, I'll pass and keep my real-world sobriety.

1992 Kawasaki Zephyr 750 Review

1992 KAWASAKI ZEPHYR 750 REVIEW

It may seem odd to some that a review is being given to a motorcycle that's more than 10 years old but in fact, one of the great things about 'bikes is that regardless of age most of them (with few exception to the exotics) are just as viable today as when they were brand-new.  The reason for this is that little has changed in motorcycle technology.  Sure, newer bikes have fuel-injection rather than carburetors and the ultra-high-end sport-bikes have engine and frame technology that's become completely high-tech, but at the end of the day does all this expensive technology make for a more enjoyable ride?  No, it's still just a motorcycle with 2 wheels, a seat, side-stand, mirrors, brake and gear-shift levers.

To wit, the 1992 Kawasaki Zephyr 750 remains one of the best all-around "standard" style 'bikes ever produced.  Based on the bullet-proof oil-air cooled engine in use for more than 40 years and frame designs going back to the 1970's legendary "Z1" the Zephyr 750 combines classic design with modern touches, such as the three-spoked, brushed lip magnesium wheels, a 4-into-2 chrome exhaust and updated emissions controls for EPA regulations.

The Zephyr isn't a sport-bike by design but it's no slouch either; twist the throttle on the rev-happy motor and you'll be greeted with plenty of low-end torque for full-stop starts and even more pull from a roll-on power-up.  And unlike it's Ninja cousins it's not top-heavy with the power-band giving the rider a very usable boost right in the middle about 5000rpm.

The decades-old engine design is not only rock-stable reliable but glass smooth too; since the compression ratio of this older motor design isn't pushed to the limits like the ZX series the engine doesn't have to work as hard nor rev as high to find it's usable power, making the Zephyr as playful in town as it is comfortable on extended high-speed freeway jaunts.  And unlike it's typically buzzy Ninja cousins you won't find any annoying bar or footpeg vibrations killing your desire for long rides.

The exhaust note from the dual pipes is equally pleasing, with a very smooth purr at idle up to low-level rpms and opening up with a slight growl with hard acceleration or high-end rpms.

From the cockpit the retro-style chrome plated gauges are easy to read and adds to the nostalgic effect the bike produces from onlookers.  And from the seat, the handlebar and footpeg distance and positioning are near-perfect, making the Zephyr 750 the most comfortable and best ergonomically designed bike I've ever ridden or owned.  Great ergonomics is something Honda totally missed the boat with on their earlier Nighthawk-S and later "Nighthawk" 750 as their footpegs were positioned too far forward to properly setup a natural balance between your hands, feet and butt.

But the overall riding experience in the Zephyr 750 is so good it's almost hard to describe.  The combination of ultra-smooth motor, predictable and usable power-band, superb riding position and retro-yet-gorgeous looks really sets this bike apart from everything else on the road, even today in 2009.  In fact, there's no bike in current production today at any price that comes close to the near-perfect riding experience from the '92 Zephyr 750.  None.

So how is the ride on the 750 Zephyr?  I've always said that riding a 'bike is the closest thing to flying while stuck on the ground and riding the 750 Zephyr certainly falls into that same feeling of freedom and a general sense of excitement. 

Because the frame is the "old-school" dual-downtube design which cradles the engine rather than making it a stressed member there's plenty of flex when you bank the Zephyr hard-over into a corner.  You can definitely feel the swing-arm bend to outside of the corner you're in but at the same time the frame is transmitting 100% feedback from the road and tires; you know *exactly* the point just before either tire starts to lose traction and can either back off throttle or unwind the lean-angle before you start kissing precious metal to the road.

In most standard and even low-end sport-bikes one of the major complaints from aggressive riding is that the stock fork-springs become easily overloaded and even bottom-out during hard braking.  I never found that to be the case with the 750 Zephyr and never did any alterations to the front-end.

Similarly, the dual-shock rear suspension had ample spring pre-load to adjust to my regularly aggressive jaunts through the twisties and never seemed to get out of sorts.  I often wondered how the 'bike would handle if it did have a box-section aluminum frame rather than the decades old dual downtube but I'm sure it would have made for a more ZX-7-type stiffness rather than a compliant ride that could handle being tossed around.

One of the great things about the bike is that because of it's retro-meets-modern look most other riders dismissed it as being lethargic and not much of a performer.  I can't tell you how many times I got surprised looks from Gxx'er, Ninja and YZF riders who couldn't  believe that not only could I gain on them in corners but often pass.  Of course in a straight-line it was no-contest as the pure sport-bikes would out-muscle the Zephyr with greater horsepower.  In fact even the '92 ZX-6 E model made more horsepower and was more fuel efficient than the 750 Zephyr.  But again, being the fastest wasn't the point of owning a Zephyr.

And speaking of performance there's yet another benefit to not having a pure sport-bike:  Insurance rates.  My '92 750 Zephyr cost about 1/10th the amount of my '92 ZX-6 to insure for a year.  And honestly, the Zephyr was a lot more fun and, much more unique.

CONCLUSION:  HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

I haven't seen any of these on the road in more than, geez... 10 or 12 years now. Kawasaki never sold these in great numbers because the American public never fell in love with the "naked sportbike" or even retro-bike concept to the level that cruisers or sport-bikes have enjoyed.  Which is really too bad since some of the worlds best motorcycles fall into the standard or "naked-sportbike" categories such as the Bandit 400, Nighthawk-S/Nighthawk 750, CB-1, CB1000, Kawi ZRX, Yamaha Fazer, GPz1100... the list goes on.

If I could find another '92 Zephyr 750 even in fair condition I'd jump on it, restore it and keep it until my bones are too old to swing over the seat.  The 750 Zephyr is by far the best looking, most enjoyable motorcycle I've ever owned, without reservation.  And that's saying something since I've owned more than 100 motorcycles in my lifetime - so far!

RIDE  SAFE:   ALWAYS WEAR A HELMET AND USE THE HIGH-BEAM DURING DAYLIGHT.