Froogles First Impressions

[159th_Viper]

Nevertheless the FM is still off.

 

How so?

[ALDEGA]

This one for example:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=107312

[Stacker]

Thanks for your feedback, but no I didn't troll you guys. That video was my honest opinion after spending quite a lot of time with the product since release. In fact, I was also one of the first people to live stream it after release. Regardless as I said, it appears I must be missing something here so down it goes, and back to the drawing board go I.

 

Yeah, fair point. Also, don't get me wrong - I'm not complaining about the fact you didn't like it, that's what reviews are all about so keep them coming! It just seemed you'd made sweeping observations with apparent little depth to back that up. If you come back and say exactly the same thing after putting in the time, no problemo.

 

Cheers.:thumbup:

[159th_Viper]

This one for example:

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=107312

 

Flight model, not rocket influence on flight model. I'm after 'Flight-Model specific' issues as there does not seem to be any specific errors reported in the Flight Dynamic sub-forum.

[metheluckydonut]

You know what, I'm pulling the video down, so apologies to newcomers that click on the link in the first message since that won't go anywhere.

 

I'm just going to remove the link.

And again, I'm in no way hating i usually really like your videos i just disagreed with what you were saying in that particular video.

[Sundowner.pl]

How so?

Here's an experiment for you:

 

Climb to an altitude, accelerate to 90kts, then maintaining that altitude rise your nose to 0° pitch. And watch how the airspeed plummets and stabilize at 60 kts. This is not what suppose to happen. Between 60 and 100 kts, you can maintain 0° pitch, with stable airspeed and stable altitude - because of the variable horizontal stabilizer in the back.

 

Here's a scan from RAAF manual, I was posting elsewhere, that talk about this:

 

This is only one thing from many that are still off with the Huey FM.

[WH_Boomer]

Thanks for your feedback, but no I didn't troll you guys. That video was my honest opinion after spending quite a lot of time with the product since release. In fact, I was also one of the first people to live stream it after release. Regardless as I said, it appears I must be missing something here so down it goes, and back to the drawing board go I.

 

The only thing you missed here sir is the level of fan boi'ism that surrounds all things in the DCS universe. Having worked on UH-1's and UH-60's in the Army, and now still working on helicopters, 25 years later, as has been mentioned, things just aren't quite right yet.

 

So how's the AI door gunners working now? I think I saw they were on strike or something and wouldn't fire on their own.

[wolle]

This is only one thing from many that are still off with the Huey FM.

 

Hi Sundowner,

 

This is what we need, constructive criticism. Make sure you make the devs aware of all imperfections you suspect in the flight model.

 

Is the ease with which the Huey enters into a VRS realistically modeled at the moment? What do you think?

[Kifter]

"...looking very much like I made some pretty poor mistakes in this video and as a result give a possibly incorrect view of the current state of the beta..."

 

Speaking as a fan of your channel Froogle and as a fan of all the DCS aircraft I would hope that you don't pull the video. I think the opinions you expressed in that video are valid. I think if people don't agree with your opinions then that's fine, not everyone is going to see things in the same way.

As you stated earlier this is a first look at this new module and these are your initial impressions. As you spend more time with the product then your opinion may differ and perhaps you can release another video stating as such and give us some insight into why. That's pretty much the whole reason I watch you videos as I like hearing your thoughts on various sim software plus the how's and why's of how you fly each of them.

 

I think pulling a video because a few people are getting up in arms about a disagreement of opinion is a mistake.

[Sundowner.pl]

Hi Sundowner,

 

This is what we need, constructive criticism. Make sure you make the devs aware of all imperfections you suspect in the flight model.

Umm... I try to actually stay away from this, I'm the customer, I shouldn't be the one to do the beta testing here, that's what the extensive testers team is for, right ?

 

Is the ease with which the Huey enters into a VRS realistically modeled at the moment? What do you think?

Actually I'm rarely finding myself in VRS, and to be honest VRS is pretty dividing topic in the pilots and aerospace engineers community, as there are a lot of cases that are either misdiagnosed for being VRS when it's settling with power, and settling with power when it's VRS, and some don't even care to draw any line there at all :smilewink: I'm not going to judge DCS:Huey VRS simulation at this stage, the earlier one, was clearly off, now it's closer to what we suppose to see, although it's hard to throw specific numbers here, as there are not many studies on this subject that would give definite answers and clear mathematical models for this phenomenon.

[159th_Viper]

 

This is only one thing from many that are still off with the Huey FM.

 

And the many are?

 

Honestly man, why drop comments like that without stating what it is that you perceive as being at fault? My sense of smell is not that refined.....yet :P

 

That's what this sub-forum is there for.

[KaspeR32]

"...looking very much like I made some pretty poor mistakes in this video and as a result give a possibly incorrect view of the current state of the beta..."

 

Speaking as a fan of your channel Froogle and as a fan of all the DCS aircraft I would hope that you don't pull the video. I think the opinions you expressed in that video are valid. I think if people don't agree with your opinions then that's fine, not everyone is going to see things in the same way.

As you stated earlier this is a first look at this new module and these are your initial impressions. As you spend more time with the product then your opinion may differ and perhaps you can release another video stating as such and give us some insight into why. That's pretty much the whole reason I watch you videos as I like hearing your thoughts on various sim software plus the how's and why's of how you fly each of them.

 

I think pulling a video because a few people are getting up in arms about a disagreement of opinion is a mistake.

 

^ What he said.

 

Even though I may have disagreed about some things that you said, doesn't mean I didn't appreciate the video. I mean, what's a youtube video without some controversy?!

[WH_Doc]

I don't think you should pull the video. I think it's more informative to everyone if we take you first impressions of the beta version of a product and see how it compares to a full review of a final product.

A quick video giving your opinion of a early version of something shouldn't be cause for such an uproar, unless people can't put the kool-aid down long enough to consider someone else's opinion and either politely agree or disagree.

[wolle]

I also think that someone's opinion should be discussed factually, and not with so much emotion, almost personally attacking the guy. I didn't get to see Froogle's video before it got pulled.

[ALDEGA]

Flight model, not rocket influence on flight model. I'm after 'Flight-Model specific' issues as there does not seem to be any specific errors reported in the Flight Dynamic sub-forum.

You're right ... that thread belongs in the flight dynamics sub forum, since it's clearly related to the flight model.

[ericoh]

The only thing you missed here sir is the level of fan boi'ism that surrounds all things in the DCS universe. Having worked on UH-1's and UH-60's in the Army, and now still working on helicopters, 25 years later, as has been mentioned, things just aren't quite right yet.

 

So how's the AI door gunners working now? I think I saw they were on strike or something and wouldn't fire on their own.

 

SADLY i have to agree there.

[froogle]

Thanks for the support guys - I do appreciate it.

 

I am not putting the video back up. I will certainly let those who want to see it have access to it, but it will remain out of sight.

 

My reasoning here is not the heat it seemed to generate, both in terms of comments on my channel, likes and dislikes on the video itself, and of course debate in here. This is only the second video I have ever pulled, the first being because I actually got threats of physical violence (yeah I know - insane!). I pulled this one because it seemed to me that there was an extremely high chance that I had missed something and thus it was a factually incorrect video. It's kind of like putting up a video saying "Game XYZ Simply Doesn't work" only to later find out your monitor was turned off.

 

So, I'm doing more research than I would normally do in a first impressions video right now and will release another first impressions later. I am taking Boomer's guidance on board since unlike most of the developers and many of you guys he actually deals with Real helicopters every day. I'm also watching closely the other threads and comments in this one actually qualifying why the stuff I found in my video is actually correct, at least in part.

 

Ultimately what I'm after is ascertaining if I was simply being a noob (despite hundreds of hours in other Helicopters on X-Plane and with my own RC ones), or something else......

 

Again thanks for the support... (edit) and feedback

Edited May 29, 2013 by froogle
adding stuff

[marker]

I agree with a lot of the other on this thread, put the video back to public Froggle. Everyone's opinions are different and they all matter to a certain extent!

 

Maybe be a good idea in maybe say 2 or 3 weeks after a few updates go and and re-evaluate the updated version directly against your old video!

[SimFreak]

so wait...we can stop sharpening our pitchforks now? No fun!

[froogle]

so wait...we can stop sharpening our pitchforks now? No fun!

 

For now.

[TimeKilla]

Major respect for removing the video and taking a second look at it in the future.

 

Thanks again

Edited May 29, 2013 by TimeKilla
Removed second part didn't sound right.

[Sundowner.pl]

That's what this sub-forum is there for.

Really ? Let's do a quick reality check here. We, the customers:

- don't have the current development build;

- don't know what errors were already found by the testers team;

- don't know what errors were already addressed;

- don't know what's on the "to do" list.

 

From what we know, anything we post there could be already found out, researched, and done.

[sobek]

Umm... I try to actually stay away from this, I'm the customer, I shouldn't be the one to do the beta testing here, that's what the extensive testers team is for, right ?

 

Since you have already done the bulk of the work and identified a number of bugs in the flight model, why let that work go to waste? A few minutes of your time to do any sort of documentation can send a tester at least on the track of what the heck you are talking about. In the absence of any substantiation of your claims of having found a fault, they are just that, a claim, and you can't honestly expect the sim to become any better by continuing to bang the drum about said claim.

Edited May 29, 2013 by sobek

[sobek]

From what we know, anything we post there could be already found out, researched, and done.

 

So the logical consequence is to inform the testers and let them either confirm that it is known or report it to the devs, not to say there is something wrong, then when asked about what "something" means, to cop out and raise a stink over not being treated as a customer (you are aware that you bought a product cleary advertised as being in a BETA stage, yes?).

 

Don't lash out at Viper, he's doing his best this very moment to make sure the flight model is as right as can be, unfortunately right now you aren't helping in the least.

Edited May 29, 2013 by sobek

[Sundowner.pl]

So the logical consequence is to inform the testers and let them either confirm that it is known or report it to the devs, not to say there is something wrong, then when asked about what "something" means, to cop out and raise a stink over not being treated as a customer

I've already shown one thing that is wrong, and in return I get hate posts for not doing testers job for them ? The hell ?

 

(you are aware that you bought a product cleary advertised as being in a BETA stage, yes?)

No, I'm being reminded over and over again, that I pre-purchased the product, and got its early development stage as a bonus.