How is a new plane modeled?

[SmokinLoon]

Your entire argument is based NOT on a quest for realism, but simply that YOU think it would be better (i.e. you want the Mossie to perform better than it does) . You love to throw the word REALISM around, when all you are speaking about is WHICH particular airplane to model, and nothing about realism.

HiTech

With all due respect, my argument is not based on making a particular plane better but rather to get the model that was used overwhelmingly vs the others available to the playing field.  I used the Mossie as my example because there are countless threads with documents showing that our current model was in the minority (less than 1 in 5 FB Mk6 has baffles), and yet nothing has been addressed.  Can you comment on why what would otherwis seem as a simple fix has not been acknowledged???

btw... it is good of you to pop your head in here.  I, amongst others, hope to see it more often especially on isses such as these.             

[SmokinLoon]

From Bohdi:
Do you really think the time wasted to "remove" them is worth it mr. nitpicker?  If so, then you have done nothing more than prove my point...

Seriously, you are worse than arguing with other nitpickers that try to tell me that CAD2 hardware never was in WW2 aircraft.  It was, and in heavy use as early 1942.  BTW, if you ever want to get anal about an airframe...  we do when we restore one to it's original configuration as built during WW2.  We deal with your type all the time trying to tell us we are wrong.  It really gets annoying having to hear the rants of amateurs.

My reply-
Lets put it this way: they’ve spent more time on far more minuscule things that made far less impact on an aircraft than allowing it to have 5-15mph more speed.  Yes, it is worth their time and I’m sure far more agree with me than not.

Secondly, what the Hell are you bringing up CAD2/airframe/restoration for what reason??? That has to do with what this thread is all about because why???  Focus Jr, focus.     

You’ve just proven yourself, again, to be an immature Jr. that is good at name-calling and looking for a fight.   

From Moot:
And that's the problem, Loon, not whether the mossie deserves that mod or whether it would be better off; which it probably would.  The absurd thing is insistence on htc not giving a rat's, and incessantly ranting about everything they're supposedly doing wrong. That they "never reply", "never adress issues", yadda yadda. If you really want to convince anyone that they are such and such, take a trip to their office in person, and report back.  Until you do, can it.

My reply-
*sigh* I don’t “incessantly rant about everything they do is wrong”, that is quite absurd and to the contrary.  Until HTC’s direct reply here I don’t recall him ever getting his hands dirty in a thread explaining the nuts-n-bolts (not that he did here, he just piped up to put a clamp on me and did nothing to alleviate the issue at hand).  If there is a thread where HTC said “what, why, how, etc”, please link me to it.  And as far as “taking a trip to their office”, while I've not ever been there I’ve actually offered to invest in their company (take it for what is worth, I guess).  So you “can it”.     

[Ex-jazz]

Hi

Very interesting topic

How this 'Look-up table' method for the flight sim's, is actually working? The Google give just very generic answers.

What kind of look-up tables there are (or should be),  for the 'different flight envelopes'?  Flight envelopes like spin, snap-spin or flat-spin / invert with different stability conditions?

I'm very curious, how the plane specific 'around the stalls' flight envelopes are/could/should modeled.

Thanks

[Bodhi]

smokingloon, I used the Cad2 reference to point out that like HT said, you are nothing more than a nitpicker that has no basis complaining about the flipping baffles. 

You're a waste of effort.

[SmokinLoon]

smokingloon, I used the Cad2 reference to point out that like HT said, you are nothing more than a nitpicker that has no basis complaining about the flipping baffles. 

You're a waste of effort.

Quite hypocritical.  Quite.

[Puck]

I used the Cad2 reference

What the heck is a CAD2, and why were they used?  Cadmium?  Did they have thermal neutron problems back then?  I know nothing about air frames, though if you ever get settled I'd sure like to come down and get educated.

---

Lookup tables are an alternative to calculation.   

In a totally hypothetical example, let's say you're flying airplane x at speed y.  I can go look in a table with x on one axis and y on the other and say "the wings are generating lift z".  It's an approximation, and does not take into effect temperature, humidity, blah blah blah, but it's staggeringly fast and close enough for the task at hand.

The upside is the speed, the down side is the approximation.  The more you calculate the more accurate the result, but the longer it takes.  I have no idea what HTC looks up and what he calculates, but they have found a balance between speed and accuracy that's hard to fault.

[Bodhi]

Quite hypocritical.  Quite.

How is it hypocritical to compare you t someone arguing over the different colors of the cadmium coating on hardware?  It is nitpicking at it's worst, and a downright waste of HTC's time and effort.

[Bodhi]

What the heck is a CAD2, and why were they used?  Cadmium?  Did they have thermal neutron problems back then?  I know nothing about air frames, though if you ever get settled I'd sure like to come down and get educated.

---

Lookup tables are an alternative to calculation.   

In a totally hypothetical example, let's say you're flying airplane x at speed y.  I can go look in a table with x on one axis and y on the other and say "the wings are generating lift z".  It's an approximation, and does not take into effect temperature, humidity, blah blah blah, but it's staggeringly fast and close enough for the task at hand.

The upside is the speed, the down side is the approximation.  The more you calculate the more accurate the result, but the longer it takes.  I have no idea what HTC looks up and what he calculates, but they have found a balance between speed and accuracy that's hard to fault.

It's the coloring of the cadmium on hardware.  Quite a few krusty like experts have tried to tell us that CAD2 (gold) was not used on ww2 aircraft.  We routinely open airframes that have not been touched since they were abandoned in WW2.  We find stuff the stuff all the time.

[moot]

"while I've not ever been there I’ve actually offered to invest in their company (take it for what is worth, I guess).  So you “can it”. "
IOW you've got no first hand idea of what HTC's about (HT has to tell you so himself), but you're willing to invest (everyone already has, 15$ a month and some of us one or more thousand so far).. something tells me that's only for more rights to tell the devs how to do their job.  There is no "issue" with keeping the FM recipe secret.  There's plenty of clues in the archives to give you a pretty good idea of how they go about modeling the planes.

It's suggested that you take a trip to grapevine because apparently you can't grasp the facts by only reading this forum.

[Puck]

It's the coloring of the cadmium on hardware.  Quite a few krusty like experts have tried to tell us that CAD2 (gold) was not used on ww2 aircraft.  We routinely open airframes that have not been touched since they were abandoned in WW2.  We find stuff the stuff all the time.

Ah.  People obsess over the plating on fasteners in the airframe?  I have obviously lived a sheltered life.  I just assumed those who do that here have none and act accordingly.

Wasn't this thread about how new aircraft are modeled, not what's wrong with $MyAircraft?

[SmokinLoon]

"while I've not ever been there I’ve actually offered to invest in their company (take it for what is worth, I guess).  So you “can it”. "
IOW you've got no first hand idea of what HTC's about (HT has to tell you so himself), but you're willing to invest (everyone already has, 15$ a month and some of us one or more thousand so far).. something tells me that's only for more rights to tell the devs how to do their job.  There is no "issue" with keeping the FM recipe secret.  There's plenty of clues in the archives to give you a pretty good idea of how they go about modeling the planes.

It's suggested that you take a trip to grapevine because apparently you can't grasp the facts by only reading this forum.

"IOW"... you have first hand knowledge?  You've been there in that office and worked on their coding and done the research?  No?  Then you're being quite the hypocrite yourself.  Dont claim to be any more knowledgable regarding the daily business activites of HTC than I, because unless you've been there and done with with HTC... yeah... thats right... you "can it".  Your higher than mighty attitude is getting the better of yourself. 

Obviously you dont know what the term "investment" means either.  Paying your $15/month fee is not investing, it is paying for their service.  I'm speaking about **investing** money into their company, you know, give them capital to work with.  Give them X amount of dollars and over time X + Y amount of dollars return.  Stop and think what one or two more full time coders could do for AH2.  Stop and think how much more additions, improvements, and corrections could be made.  That is what I am talking about when I say "investing".  Also, something tells me your post count or the length of time you've been playing means jack squat (actually, HTC already alluded that post counts mean nothing    ).  The minute you stop paying is the minute you mean nothing and that goes for all of us, and even when you're paying your voice is no louder than anyone elses.  HTC/AH2 is a business and the color of money is all the same.     

I've got a grasp on facts and reality that far outreach your capability.  Believe it. 


btw... are we going to hear HTC's response to my question???   

[moot]

I'm no hypocrit.. You could say I've had the same pov as you a long time ago. I'm gonna quit here cause your conversation is pointless. Far outreach my capability huh... LOL
Good luck convincing HTC they're doing it wrong.
<S>

edit- Actualy read your post instead of skipping it on the assumption it's more clueless arrogant garbage.. You're basicaly saying you want to buy influence with HTC, to steer their development differently from what it is now? 

Give them X amount of dollars and over time X + Y amount of dollars return.  Stop and think what one or two more full time coders could do for AH2.  Stop and think how much more additions, improvements, and corrections could be made.  That is what I am talking about when I say "investing".

No poop.. You think you're the first one to come up with this?  And suggest it to them?

And high and mighty?  Mate.. I'm just calling it exactly like I see it. 10 years following the game update after update and comment after comment from the devs, and hearing the feedback pretty much straight from the horse's mouth from the Cons is enough to get at least as much perspective as a lot of us have, unless you're deaf and blind. It's got nothing to do with chest thumping, which no one else but you brought into this. Post counts? What are you smoking? You pay more attention to it than I do. You really need a clue.. Like I said.. Quit yappin about being right and put your money where your mouth is. Stop posting on the forum and do it, call em up and see if your money is worth so much more than their vision of what the game and development rationale ought to be. Till then..

[macleod01]

Im sorry if this is between Moot, loon and Bhodi but im going to but in here.

Loon. I know nothing baout how HT goes about coding. Very few, if anyone on these boards know how they go about creating it. If your complaining about the baffles on the mossi, then start complaining about the 3 gun LA, the fact we got a Stuka D instead of a G or B, that we haven't got the HE 111 etc. If you go into detail, there is COUNTLESS things one could nitpick at. Whats the point? Whats it going to achieve? All its going to do is ruin your fun in game, which by the sounds of it, is non existant for you. HT has said that your nitpicking (Coming back to you Hitech sir), so why dont you just let it go. Enjoy the game for what it is! I dont buy a game, then expect to be able to complain about it and recreate it due to one small fact, which is historically correct! I would say let it go, because at the minute your looking like a 5 year old, who's throwing a tantrum in a supermarket, and just making your self seem less of a man.

Ok, back to Hitech. You stated that 'Wise men speak only when they have something useful to say'. Now Ive got a lower post count than you, does that make me wiser? 

p.s Please dont ban me! 

[SmokinLoon]

Im sorry if this is between Moot, loon and Bhodi but im going to but in here.

Loon. I know nothing baout how HT goes about coding. Very few, if anyone on these boards know how they go about creating it. If your complaining about the baffles on the mossi, then start complaining about the 3 gun LA, the fact we got a Stuka D instead of a G or B, that we haven't got the HE 111 etc. If you go into detail, there is COUNTLESS things one could nitpick at. Whats the point? Whats it going to achieve? All its going to do is ruin your fun in game, which by the sounds of it, is non existant for you. HT has said that your nitpicking (Coming back to you Hitech sir), so why dont you just let it go. Enjoy the game for what it is! I dont buy a game, then expect to be able to complain about it and recreate it due to one small fact, which is historically correct! I would say let it go, because at the minute your looking like a 5 year old, who's throwing a tantrum in a supermarket, and just making your self seem less of a man.

Ok, back to Hitech. You stated that 'Wise men speak only when they have something useful to say'. Now Ive got a lower post count than you, does that make me wiser? 

p.s Please dont ban me! 

Quite the contrary... I enjoy the heck out of this sim/game.  I wouldnt be here in this forum or playing the game as much as I do if I didnt.  For what it is worth, I'd rather lose and have fun than win and not have fun.  I have said repeatedly that I appreciate the efforts of the HTC's sim/game as there isnt anything else like it (Warbirds evidently used to be similar but AH2 has now extended its lead???).  I am not guilty of "nit-picking" any more than anyone else, but my desire to have things accurately represented for on a multitude of objects when the fixes have been well presented and are elementary according to the coders.       

If you would have read my post, I made a reference to selecting the Mossie as an example because of the numerous threads and the evidence presented in those threads that have presented facts that the current AH2 FB Mk6 was quite in the minority (again, only 1/5 of the FB Mk6 had baffles) and used for night or low light missions.  I said specifically that there were many other aicraft that had controversial/questionable modeling but simply chose the Mossie to mention. 

**Notice how HTC poked his head in to say I'm "nit-picking" but offered no explanation to a simple question???** So many threads like this would be done and over with on page 1 if someone from HTC would simple step in and answer with a sentence or two explaining HTC's postion.  Instead, we have page after page of "you're a nit picker/no I'm not".  No one with any authority and true knowledge on the matter has offered an explanation as to why, and those who have tried have done nothing but proven they know nothing but how to sling mud, call names, and proven themselves "not in the know".       

[Bronk]

So is the mossie with flame dampers properly modeled or not?

Note: I'm not asking if need an additional ac modeled without is needed. We have a wish list for that.