Collisions

[Wiley]

Intersting, YOU decide what someone is REALLY saying, YOU put words into their mouth, then YOU argue about WHY what YOU say they said was wrong ... and YOU always win ... Big suprise!

No...  You said earlier in the thread, in post 31 which you referenced as your definitive statement of your position:

BOTH partys going down in the event of a collision would undoubtedly diminish the number of collisions taking place dramatically.

Which means you want the P47 from the gif to go down when the P51 runs into it.  That is the consequence of "both partys going down in the event of a collision".  Make sense?

Maybe you misunderstand the word illustration ... Yes it's a film, not a cartoon ... it's PURPOSE is to ILLUSTRATE ... Got a good dictionary?

Could you lend me the one that contained the word 'syncopant'?  Then we'd at least be making the same mistakes.

Your exact words were:

The 4 plane explanation -illustrates- the fact that they are time displaced due to internet limitations ... it's NOT a factual reality ...

I have asked you to explain what part of two time synchronized films from two different computers of the same event is NOT a factual reality.  Relatively simple, yes?

Wiley.

[Lusche]

Maybe this is even more "illustrating"

From the collision incident in the films above: This is the P-47 players view of the whole thing, the moment of "collision".You being the P-47 pilot... should you go down?

[Skuzzy]

Please quote to me WHERE -I- "insist" on anything? I want, I think, I believe ... yes ... I do... I INSIST ...??? Don't think so.

_You_  collide,  _You_  do not,  _You_  both ...  fishing expedition?

Ok fair enough.  You expect your plane to be damaged when you avoid a collision.  True?  If not true, then please elaborate.

No fishing expedition.  I am asking you how think they work in each of those circumstances.  It is pertinent to the discussion.

EVZ, I would really like to hear how you think collisions currently work in the following scenarios.

1)  You collide and take damage and the other plane flies away.
2)  You do not collide but the other plane takes damage and you fly away.
3)  You both collide and take damage.

Please be as detailed as possible.

Whay is this so difficult to answer?

[RTHolmes]

I would really like to hear how you think collisions currently work in the following scenarios.

1)  You collide and take damage and the other plane flies away.
2)  You do not collide but the other plane takes damage and you fly away.
3)  You both collide and take damage.

ok EVZ heres my answers for the 3 questions. I'll fill in the blanks when you've answered them. fair enuf?

1) ----- --- - --------- -------- -- -- --------, -- - ---- ------. ----- --- -- --------- -------- -- --- --------, -- -- --- --- ---- ------.

2) ----- --- -- --------- -------- -- -- --------, -- - --- --- ---- ------. ----- --- - --------- -------- -- --- --------, -- -- --- ---- ------.

3) ----- --- - --------- -------- -- -- --------, --- ---- - --------- -------- -- --- --------. -- -- ---- ---- ------.

[FLS]

I think we hit the "agree to disagree" point 10 pages ago. It's just a Lufbery now.

[Wiley]

I think we hit the "agree to disagree" point 10 pages ago. It's just a Lufbery now.

I had thought so as well, but recent posts seem to indicate he doesn't actually get it.

Either understanding is starting to dawn, or he's an above average troll.

Wiley.

[VonMessa]

I think we hit the "agree to disagree" point 10 pages ago. It's just a Lufbery now.

The thing about facts is that you cannot disagree with them.

You don't have to like them, but there is not any level of agreement to dispute.

Collisions are not some mysterious voodoo secret.  The facts of how the system works are being presented by the folks that designed the system and those same people are being told that they are wrong in their explanation.

The debate is really beyond idiocy.

[EVZ]

you want the P47 from the gif to go down when the P51 runs into it.

I find it unlikely that such an event would occur during game play ... maybe if the 47 pilot was AFK ... But yes, the 47 would go down.

I have asked you to explain what part of two time synchronized films from two different computers of the same event is NOT a factual reality.  Relatively simple, yes?

It is a contrived manipulation, mechanically created and assembled to illustrate a precovcieved concept ... it's not a factual reality any more than a kiddy cartoon is.

[VonMessa]

See rule #4

[Lusche]

I find it unlikely that such an event would occur during game play ... maybe if the 47 pilot was AFK ... But yes, the 47 would go down.
It is a contrived manipulation, mechanically created and assembled to illustrate a precovcieved concept ... it's not a factual reality any more than a kiddy cartoon is.

The picture above has not been "manipulated" in any way, so you should be able to answer the very straightforward question...

[EVZ]

You expect your plane to be damaged when you avoid a collision.  True?  If not true, then please elaborate.

Depends on what the other pilot experiences.

[Wiley]

I find it unlikely that such an event would occur during game play ... maybe if the 47 pilot was AFK ... But yes, the 47 would go down.

And you believe that people would find a collision that occurred with a plane that wasn't anywhere near you less annoying than the other plane surviving an impact.

It is a contrived manipulation, mechanically created and assembled to illustrate a precovcieved concept ... it's not a factual reality any more than a kiddy cartoon is.

It is an example to make it easy for people such as yourself to follow.  The mechanics and result are the same regardless of how it happens.  In fact, two planes maneuvering hard would actually show something even more different on each end than what you see here.  This one is used so you can clearly see that the P51 is nowhere near the P47 from its end, so you can clearly see that there is no way that it touched the P51 on its end.  It is also easy to follow because one of the planes isn't maneuvering.

It is done as a demonstration of how it works, but the same kind of thing happens if they are wildly scissoring.

Wiley.

[Karnak]

I find it unlikely that such an event would occur during game play ... maybe if the 47 pilot was AFK ... But yes, the 47 would go down.

Why would such an event not occur during gameplay?  Why would it matter if the P-47 is straight and level compared to in a bank, dive or climb?  The P-51 will still miss the P-47 by about four plane lengths on the P-47 player's computer.

[FLS]

I had thought so as well, but recent posts seem to indicate he doesn't actually get it.

Either understanding is starting to dawn, or he's an above average troll.

Wiley.

10 pages ago he said he gets it but disagrees with it. Nothing has changed since then.

[Skuzzy]

I find it unlikely that such an event would occur during game play ... maybe if the 47 pilot was AFK ... But yes, the 47 would go down.
It is a contrived manipulation, mechanically created and assembled to illustrate a precovcieved concept ... it's not a factual reality any more than a kiddy cartoon is.

The film is a factual representation of the collision system at work.

You expect your plane to be damaged when you avoid a collision.  True?  If not true, then please elaborate.

Depends on what the other pilot experiences.

Please elaborate on the "dependencies".


EVZ, I would really like to hear how you think collisions currently work in the following scenarios.

1)  You collide and take damage and the other plane flies away.
2)  You do not collide but the other plane takes damage and you fly away.
3)  You both collide and take damage.

Please be as detailed as possible.