Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: calan on March 22, 2006, 02:51:14 PM
-
The online plane database is now up:
.http://www.jcsautomation.com/AH_View_Vehicles.asp (http://www.jcsautomation.com/AH_View_Vehicles.asp)
We need a few knowledgable and open-minded people to take a minute or two and rate any planes that you are familiar with. It is really simple and self-explanatory, and only takes 20-30 seconds per plane. If you do rate a plane or add comments, please enter your AH name in the space provided.
Please read the disclaimer at the bottom of the page... I know this is SUBJECTIVE :)
Once we get a consensus on the information we will lock the data entry and start building links and info pages.
Eventually, we will be adding pics, charts, and other goodies.
TIA!
Calan
-
I should also mention.... let's try to only have one or two "Elite" planes for each category.
While several may be generally considered "Elite", for our purposes we are using that rating to set the absolute best in the game.
-
Hi Calan,
>The online plane database is now up:
Cool site! :-) Great work, I just love it!
>Please read the disclaimer at the bottom of the page... I know this is SUBJECTIVE :)
Hey, thanks to your systematic approach your site has the potential for SYSTEMATIC subjectivity:
You have created one set of data for each aircraft, ranking a number of characteristics for that aircraft, under the name "Plane Information".
Now put up the same data sheet for a second database called "Pilot Priorities". Every Pilot can enter his subjective preferences there, rating each characteristic there according to his preferences. The scale from "1" to "6" will read "doesn't matter" to "extremely important".
That will enable you to rank each aircraft according to each pilot's set of preferences. (Simply multiply each aircraft characteristic's figure by the pilot priority figure and add all values for one plane.)
That will give you a ranking of the list of all aircraft as seen through the eyes of any pilot who fills out and saves his priority sheet :-)
Which aircraft comes out top according to HoHun's priorities, for example? Well, I'd rate top speed, visibility, roll rate and dive speed as most important. Other pilots would undoubtly enter completely different priorities, ranking slow speed turn rate and firepower much higher than I do.
I imagine that will not only be interesting from a tactical point of view, but also a lot of fun as you get the opportunity to see how the planes compare to each other in in the eyes of different pilots :-) Want to see the world the HoHun way? Click on my name to rank the planes according to my criteria! You prefer Widewing's flying style? Click his name and get a completely different ranking using his priorities! :-)
Of course, none of these lists would ever be final, but I'm sure they'd all be excellent food for thought!
Congrats on your site and your creativity! :-) That's a very good approach you have taken there!
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Thanks HoHun... I hope I can get a good response with responsible numbers being entered. I'm sure at some point we will have to get 4-5 respected vets to verify all the inputs and lock it down.
As for your other point... This is already in the works ;)
I'm working on a methodoly that allows you to select (10?) attributes in order of priority, and the data is then sorted and displayed based on that selection.
I'm bouncing around some ideas for weighting each attribute based on personal preference, but I want to wait until I have more data and see how things work out.
If this becomes popular and we get good data and a following, I may create a user login so that preferences, weighting, and other stuff can be stored for each person that visits the site.
Thanks for the feedback!
Calan
-
Good job !
-
Hi Calan,
>As for your other point... This is already in the works ;)
Excellent :-) I'm looking forward to it!
>I'm working on a methodoly that allows you to select (10?) attributes in order of priority, and the data is then sorted and displayed based on that selection.
Hm, I think that might introduce some random element as I'm sure there will be characteristics that are of equal importance. I'd really use the very same sheet as for the planes, just with other labels for the numbers.
>I'm bouncing around some ideas for weighting each attribute based on personal preference
Ah, of course you're right - I was thinking of a weighting process! I failed to think of it in that way, but you're spot on.
>If this becomes popular and we get good data and a following, I may create a user login so that preferences, weighting, and other stuff can be stored for each person that visits the site.
I thought you could actually make the users' weighting data public (at least in read mode) with everyone just adding his data set to the existing ones. I think of "weighting" and "preferences" as one process - do you see them as separate? Just asking because of your choice of words.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
-
Originally posted by HoHun
...
I thought you could actually make the users' weighting data public (at least in read mode) with everyone just adding his data set to the existing ones.
...
hmmm.. well the problem with one weighting table (a single weight value for each attribute), is that it will be either:
1. A fixed set of values based on what people tell me and I decide :p , or
2. The values of the last person to update it (if we allow updates to it), or
3. Average values based on all the people who have updated it.
#3 is the better option, but it still doesn't accurately reflect what any single person may want to see. It does however provide some useful insight as to how people prioritize plane qualities, since it is an average.
The best way to do it is to store a weighting value for each attribute, for each pilot... but that requires a database login so that the information in the various tables can be accurately linked.
I'll probably end up there eventually... I just have to get decent data entered first, that everyone can basically agree on. My main concern is that people will rate the planes with an "attribute priority" in mind, rather than based on pure performance.
I'm not asking for much am I? :lol
-
I should mention...
If any of you guys modify the data and add comments (or see that something has changed since you modified it), please check the comments field every now and then for the planes you've modified.
Also be sure to update the "best alt" and "nickname" fields.
While we are in the initial "population" mode, I might make minor adjustments due to something I have in mind with the data. In this case, I'll post something in the comments field to explain the method behind my madness :)
Tks
Calan
-
Nice job Calan
-
Thanks FTJR !
And thanks for updating some planes (please see comments on one of them).
I hope more people get involved and we can get a reasonable consensus and data input. Otherwise, I'm gonna have to hunt down 5-6 knowledgable old farts and bribe them with beer and women :rofl
Calan
-
Hi Calan,
>I hope more people get involved and we can get a reasonable consensus and data input.
Hm, I just pasted the data base into Excel and applied the ranking method I suggested.
The result: The Me 262 didn't come out on top! There must be something wrong with your data base ;-)
Seriously, I noticed that there are several propeller fighters with speed locked at "6", while the Me 262, though faster, is locked out of "6". In the presence of jet fighters, there should be no propeller plane that gets a "6" for speed.
Even correcting for that, there is no set of reasonable weights that could bring the Me 262 into the top group, which I understand as an indication that the ratings are still a bit preliminary.
Here are my Top Ten:
P-47N 100%
P-51D 95%
F4U-4 93%
Fw 190A-5 92%
Me 262 91%
Spitfire Mk XVI 91%
P-47D-25 89%
P-47D-40 89%
Tempest Mk V 89%
F4U-1D 88%
Using:
Rrl 4; CAl 0; CAh 0; Dcl 1; LST 1; HST 2; Div 4; Spd 6; Rng 2; WP 4; WB 2; Srv 2; Eng 1; CPV 5; AA 0; AG 0
I don't believe the Fw 190A-5 should be that high up in the list, and the absence of the Dora looks suspicious to me, too. I'm not sure how the Tempest got so low in my ranking, and how the P-51D (a very fine plane, admittedly) got so high. The P-47N seems impossible to beat.
Maybe linear weights are not good enough and I should use a progressive scale :-/
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)