Sgt_Joch Posted January 16, 2018 Posted January 16, 2018 'Slight' LW bias. The data selected is chosen for putting the 109 in the very best light. wow, necro thread. Personally, I find both sites have a bias, but that does not invalidate the data they provide. Both sites perform an invaluable service to the flight sim community. 2
Beazil Posted January 16, 2018 Posted January 16, 2018 Really guys? Neither of the sites (or any similar one) deserves any bashing. Maybe you give anyone who puts in loads of time and money to make all this information freely available to us a little bit of credit. I'm not taking sides here, but well said.
Panthera Posted January 16, 2018 Posted January 16, 2018 Well, lets go to Bodenplatte aircraft, open up a topic on the D-9 and lets see what we can learn about the D-9. In addition to the cringeworthy information provided by the site. I'd be happy to learn if there's anything new, the devs might be interested, and we'd let this topic be about Bf109G-6 climb rates again. I'm quite confident that the devs have said information, doesn't take a whole lot of digging to get it. So providing they have someone in charge of research who's doing his job, then we can rest easy
NZTyphoon Posted January 16, 2018 Posted January 16, 2018 I don't really feel the need to "right any wrongs" by Williams, he's free to write what he wants, I just only ever use his site for quick information on Allied aircraft. If I need specific information on the performance of certain German aircraft I have lots original source material to pick from on my own harddrive and in books. I have Mike Williams' contact details, so, if you choose to, you can discuss your problems with Mike personally, instead of dissing him and his website on an internet forum he's not even a part of. 2
Panthera Posted January 17, 2018 Posted January 17, 2018 (edited) I have Mike Williams' contact details, so, if you choose to, you can discuss your problems with Mike personally, instead of dissing him and his website on an internet forum he's not even a part of. [Edited] Please keep the posts in this thread on the subject matter and not on personal criticisms of people whose conclusions you disagree with. Edited January 18, 2018 by Bearcat 1
=362nd_FS=Hiromachi Posted January 17, 2018 Posted January 17, 2018 It's not critics. Critics would require a sensible argument with solid basis to support it. You have neither. What you have presented so far constitutes term "hating". 1
NZTyphoon Posted January 17, 2018 Posted January 17, 2018 (edited) Like I said he's free to write what'ever he wants, and I am free to criticise any website I see fit as well. That's okay, 'cause Mike spent a lot more time working with Dietmar Hermann, who is a real expert on the 190, than he did listening to the opinions of armchair critics, who claim to have so much more and better information available, but never actually present it. Edited January 17, 2018 by NZTyphoon 1
Kurfurst Posted January 17, 2018 Posted January 17, 2018 (edited) What is lacking and selective about all? You are kidding, right? [Edited] Please keep the posts in this thread on the subject matter and not on personal criticisms of people whose conclusions you disagree with. Edited January 18, 2018 by Bearcat
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now