A word to the community - Let's remember what connects us!

[msalama]

in an attempt to validate FM performance

Then by all means air your concerns and present evidence backing your case, and I'm CERTAIN you'll be listened to. Edited November 11, 2015 by msalama

[BlackLion213]

The 'nuts and bolts' are a mystery to us. Often times the burden of proof is placed on the customer to prove their concern. I don't feel a paying customer should have to pour through technical papers, purchase flight manuals, export flight telemetry data, then plot the data to prove something in the FM is wrong.

 

How else can you prove that something is wrong? If the FM felt not quite right to the developer, they would likely adjust or further validate prior to release. So the customer's report of an FM problem likely contradicts the developers position, should they changes something to validate one persons concern without checking data or requesting data? What if the FM seems off to you, but perfect for me...should they change it for one customer at the expense of the other customers who like the flight model?

 

Data is the only way to solve it, it is the (generally) trustworthy mediator of these discussions and issues. Plus, if someone cannot find any data or references to support their position, why should it be given much weight? These models were created with data, they should not be torn apart without some basis of support.

 

My 2 cents,

 

Nick

Edited November 11, 2015 by BlackLion213

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

This thread is turned into exactly what is set out not to be.

 

Your post is needlessly condescending. You know nothing about my education or background. I have spent hundreds of hours exporting and analyzing telemetry in an attempt to validate FM performance. I have read hundreds of journal articles, NASA papers, DTIC papers, and every TO manual I can get my hands on. Yet there is no doubt in your mind that I'm not well read and I don't want to bother with all that science nonsense based of one post that you disagree with.

It wasn't meant to be. Then again, you're misconstruing everything I stated. All I said is if you feel that a particular module isn't pleasing you, why should you feel compelled to buy it? What's so condescending about telling someone they should feel entitled to a satisfactory product and to ignore those that aren't?

 

And you're right, I don't know anything of your education and your background. More importantly, I don't really care. Especially, if approached with that sort of attitude. If you're this well read, then it shouldn't be a problem to point out if an FM is wrong. If you're that well informed and experienced in the subject matter, why is it a chore? Look at it from the POV of the developer: You have someone posting a topic, telling them their flight model is wrong, and offering up a vague (if at all) reasoning as to why.

 

That is not constructive. It only becomes constructive when someone contributes to said thread the hard data that allows the developer to make the necessary corrections.

 

Don't take things so personal.

 

So, yes, it should require actual data to substantiate the claims made. Is it undesirable? Yes and no. Yes, in that it will require leg work to fix and the ease of which is completely dependent on the airframe in question. However, it is desirable in that (provided you're successful, of course) you have the hard data to provide which the developer can ignore at their own peril.

 

Should you do it? You'd certainly garner favor from your fellow players. But, if you don't want to, don't. No one here is telling you that you, personally, have to become a Google investigator to try and dig up flight performance envelopes.

Edited November 11, 2015 by MiG21bisFishbedL

[msalama]

Nick: my point exactly.

[Lt_Maverick]

I haven't been on this forum for that long. I just realized I could use an app that I used to use as a moderator for other forums that were bodybuilding related (tapatalk).

 

What really got me into DCS back in the day was the video of NTTR in 2011 with Linkin Park burning skies. I was pretty much hooked at that point. I already owned LOMAC 1&2 but this made me really want to learn how to pilot these aircraft, plus I was kind of new to the Air Force scene when I saw the video.

 

One thing I have to say is that I have seen other forums that are exponentially worse when it comes to interactive video entertainment and their following. I was on a watch mojo top 10 about aerial combat and was surprised a casual top 10 video game video review ranked the IL2 Series, DCS, and Falcon all in the top 5. The only thing that bothered me was that Rise of Flight was only "honorably mentioned." I made the mistake of reading the comments and saw one kid reply to a comment: "STFO %#^*, War Thunder has real live physics" blah blah. In response to a post about Ace Combat. That's like arguing about who's more tough: a Yorkshire Terrier or a Pomeranian.

 

Others commented that Gaijin was king because they had 3 games on there (they thought the entire IL2 series was developed by gaijin). The point of this is that gaming for some reason brings out the stupidity in people universally. However, I find that the most repulsive of comments on this forum couldn't hold a match to the 5 alarm fire of the low information crowd. Most of people who actively comment or argue about video games are the low information crowd. The irony. Sitting on the internet/information highway spewing inaccuracies when one simply has to click on a new tab to research their point. The sim community and DCS is not for the low information crowd. Many people here have a respectable background in something. Call me a sadist, or masochist depending upon how you look at it, but I find the negative reviews on Steam about DCS and other sims I hold dear quite comical sometimes. I sometimes think to myself "and you are why I would never play [insert multiple iteration rail shooter"

 

So far I've thoroughly enjoyed this community. I have a tough choice to make. I am part of a clan that plays BF3&4 and I mainly stick around because of the friends I've made. However, I don't play BF often, and we don't have any sims on our roster of games so I just handle video editing. Meanwhile, there are countless VFS out there who play all of the sims I play that I may end up joining.

 

My biggest gripe is that some concerns listed do not have screen captures or videos. If you're having issues just post a video so the altitude, speed, ETC. can be analyzed. Saving the track and recording with FRAPS or Shadowplay can go a long way.

 

 

 

 

"The first time I ever saw a jet, I shot it down."- General Chuck Yeager, USAF, describing his first confrontation with a Me262.

 

 

JayRac3r/Lt_Mav YouTube Channel

[Captain Midnight]

His need to feel like he has to tell others how to act.

 

THIS. People who have 38 posts shouldn't come on a forum to inform everyone else how they should act. You're just embarrassing yourself.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

THIS. People who have 38 posts shouldn't come on a forum to inform everyone else how they should act. You're just embarrassing yourself.

 

I fail to see the impact post count has. If he has a point, he has a point.

[StandingCow]

THIS. People who have 38 posts shouldn't come on a forum to inform everyone else how they should act. You're just embarrassing yourself.

 

Post count has absolutely zero to do with anything, especially this. How do you know he doesn't mostly just read the forums?

 

You don't need to post a lot to get a feel for a community.

[Aginor]

Agree. Why the hell should the posts by SkipperSMG be less important or read-worthy than those of Sithspawn, StandingCow or me?

EDIT: I dislike post counts anway, since they encourage double-postings, spamming, and comparisons of users based not on what they say but on how often they say something.

Edited November 13, 2015 by Aginor

[VincentLaw]

I agree. We should evaluate the content of posts, not the person who posted them. Contributions from a user with a low post count are not any less valuable. We should strive to welcome both new and old but quiet members so that our community may grow and prosper.