Enhanced Flying Circus simulation using flight recording data from Levil BOM?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

7 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

This is being done for “posterity”?  Lol

 

Can’t Carlson do it for “posterity” on his own?  
 

Of course he can.  Only problem is that he doesn’t care about pestering WW1 flight sim developers.

Why you care you are not that ww1 flight sim developer?

They can reject any feedback good or bad they are grown man let them decide. Who knows if they call it pestering...

They can use it or loose it, no pressure. 

Edited August 2, 2021 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[ST_Catchov]

21 hours ago, Holtzauge said:

But PLEASE let's not turn this into another DM thread!

 

19 hours ago, J2_Trupobaw said:

DM is a completely separate problem

 

My apologies for bringing up that dreaded phrase. For arguments sake I'll refer to it herewith as #bollocks. Let me try to explain ....

 

The whole premise of your suggestion is to get FM data from Mikael to make two FC aeroplanes D7, Dr1 (maybe 3 with N28?) more realistic in FC. Right? That in itself is limiting (what about the other planes?) let alone whether the devs want to do it (for a myriad of business reasons) or can implement the results for home PC's?

 

Now the reason I brought up the #bollocks is because in my considered opinion the FM for all planes is pretty good. They all fly well and feel right(*). Or close enough for a game. The problem occurs when the #bollocks comes into the picture. The FM's are good until the #bollocks either overdoes or underdoes the #bollocking. That is the cause of the frustration. Not the undamaged FM. So why go to all this trouble to change (a few) FM's which gamers playing the game seem to like anyway and find it enjoyable. Fix the #bollocks and there'd be no talk of the FM's. Well, not as much.

 

 

(*)Se5a excluded.

[J2_Trupobaw]

10 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

This is being done for “posterity”?  Lol

 

Can’t Carlson do it for “posterity” on his own?  
 

Of course he can.  Only problem is that he doesn’t care about pestering WW1 flight sim developers.

You hurt me, BSR ? . This is being done so you can start shoveing link to hard numbers in peoples faces wherever they bring up their favourite pilot memoirs ghostwritten in 1930 as source on plane performance. Surely you can appreciate the potential to prove other people wrong here.

[Holtzauge]

2 hours ago, ST_Catchov said:

 

 

My apologies for bringing up that dreaded phrase. For arguments sake I'll refer to it herewith as #bollocks. Let me try to explain ....

 

The whole premise of your suggestion is to get FM data from Mikael to make two FC aeroplanes D7, Dr1 (maybe 3 with N28?) more realistic in FC. Right? That in itself is limiting (what about the other planes?) let alone whether the devs want to do it (for a myriad of business reasons) or can implement the results for home PC's?

 

Now the reason I brought up the #bollocks is because in my considered opinion the FM for all planes is pretty good. They all fly well and feel right(*). Or close enough for a game. The problem occurs when the #bollocks comes into the picture. The FM's are good until the #bollocks either overdoes or underdoes the #bollocking. That is the cause of the frustration. Not the undamaged FM. So why go to all this trouble to change (a few) FM's which gamers playing the game seem to like anyway and find it enjoyable. Fix the #bollocks and there'd be no talk of the FM's. Well, not as much.

 

 

(*)Se5a excluded.

 

I totally agree with you on the order of priority and I would also prefer to see the DM addressed first. OTOH just as we concluded earlier that is a another issue altogether and I don’t think Mikael will be very positive to me bringing along a Vicker's and shooting some holes in his spars and then asking him to fly and check if the wings come off…….

 

OTOH what he has said is that if we provide a BOM he is willing to fly with it and gather data. In fact I even spoke to him very briefly about it on Saturday and based on that sent a mail to Levil Aviation to get some more technical info on how and where to mount it. However, given that most poll responses have been negative and with a current total of only 11 positives, it looks like the best way forward is to take @Chill31 up on his generous offer and conclude that the idea to crowdfund a BOM via this forum is stillborn.

Edited August 2, 2021 by Holtzauge

[J5_Adam]

I'm actually interested but I cannot contribute financially. Poll is limited and the question is 2 parts rolled into one.