Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Mathijs Kok

Twin Otter Extended Preview (FSX,P3D)

1882 posts in this topic

What exactly is ''extended'' in this version? I don't see the big difference...

Yow, is this dude for real? I think we'll all pretend this post doesn't exist on this forum. Dude, do you have the present Twin Otter? Have you been following this topic from page 1? Have you not read about the level of realism when it comes to system integration into the Extended. Can you not even SEE the visual difference in the models? If you're going to post ignorant comments like this and insult the intelligence of the developers, beta testers, members and general enthusiasts who can SEE what you can't, do yourself a favor. Go examine pictures of the current model and the Extended pictures on here with a TELESCOPE! If you still can't see a difference then.....yeah, it really IS just you! Get rid if your account and quit posting. I just hate it when people who are clearly ignorant of excellence choose to exude the fact that theyare intellectually circumcised. Mathis, Finn, Stefan, Joshua, Eric and all you guys, pay this dude no mind. Keep up the excellent work. We "intelligent" simmers and Twotter fans are patiently waiting and silently congratulating.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there an email "watch" list I can be put onto? I'd like to know as soon as this is released so I can make the purchase. I have a lot of fun flying the original Aerosoft Twin Otter, and I'm really looking forward to the Extended version's release.

@Rasha01: Everything is different except the general type of aircraft being modeled. The "Extended" version is a completely new build-up. Call it a 2013 model year versus the '06 <?> model of the original. Graphically it will be a quantum leap ahead of the current model and the FM/FDE promises to be quite a bit more extensively detailed than the original. See what Mathijs wrote above? "...there is not a single bit of the Twin Otter X project used in the Twin Otter Extended."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there an email "watch" list I can be put onto? I'd like to know as soon as this is released so I can make the purchase. I have a lot of fun flying the original Aerosoft Twin Otter, and I'm really looking forward to the Extended version's release.

@Rasha01: Everything is different except the general type of aircraft being modeled. The "Extended" version is a completely new build-up. Call it a 2013 model year versus the '06 <?> model of the original. Graphically it will be a quantum leap ahead of the current model and the FM/FDE promises to be quite a bit more extensively detailed than the original. See what Mathijs wrote above? "...there is not a single bit of the Twin Otter X project used in the Twin Otter Extended."

Either subscribe to the thread or the new releaes and updates forum. Or at the aerosoft store subscribe to the news letter, Im pretty sure it will be announced there when released.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What kind of logic is that ?

Finn

Hi Finn,

The experience shows that is very difficult to develop perfect software products! There are almost always smaller or bigger issues when software is released. My thoughts were: The more different beta testers are testing the plane, the installer, the handling of tools and the manual the higher is the chance to discover and fix certain issues before release. More testers have different approaches to do certain things and different hardware and different setups which also increase the chance to find issues before release. So I meant that the more beta testers are testing the higher is the chance that the final product will be close to perfect and easy to handle and good to understand than if fewer testers would look over it.

Same is for the second part: The more testers the faster are certain milestones achieved. I assume that you have a certain schedule to go through and benchmark to reach before you consider the product ready for release and I think that more testers can reach these milestones faster than fewer testers. Correct?

Btw: Do you have some not so experienced beta testers that represent the customers not so experienced with FSX, engine technology and handling of aircraft in general and Twin Otter in particular?

Anyway, let the team do its work and we customers will see what comes out of it. I don’t want to go too far off topic.

Best regards,

Till

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw: Do you have some not so experienced beta testers that represent the customers not so experienced with FSX, engine technology and handling of aircraft in general and Twin Otter in particular?

At least regarding the Twin Otter as an airliner and the operating techniquest I have no idea of this airplane so I guess yes.

On the first few start attempts I have burned my engines down because I didn't think of the prop levers which need to be put into the feather setting before start.

Actually I'm kinda sure if this won't be one of the biggest headlines in the manual (well, but even then some people don't even read it) quite some "bugreports" will come by unexperienced users.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least regarding the Twin Otter as an airliner and the operating techniquest I have no idea of this airplane so I guess yes.

On the first few start attempts I have burned my engines down because I didn't think of the prop levers which need to be put into the feather setting before start.

Actually I'm kinda sure if this won't be one of the biggest headlines in the manual (well, but even then some people don't even read it) quite some "bugreports" will come by unexperienced users.

:excellenttext_s:

I am glad to hear that! Have fun with testing this great bird!

Looking forward to the final product!

Best, Till

P.S. There are some users reading the manual (at least one) :banghead1_s:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What exactly is ''extended'' in this version? I don't see the big difference...

Just that the previous version was a moderate complexity project done in 2009 and this is state of the art work with high complexity.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how is the passenger cabin modeling coming mathijs

Think that started this week.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and no, the warm climate screw will not have the female pilot in bikini.

:lol: Damn, I dont know if I'd want to screw her if she's not in a bikini ;)

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mathijs!

Not only a future splendid airplane but also a freudian slip!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Mathijs!

Not only a future splendid airplane but also a freudian slip!

Great find Panxua! You deserve the HERO OF THE DAY badge really!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great find Panxua! You deserve the HERO OF THE DAY badge really!

archhhhh

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

archhhhh

LoL Great job guys!

Not only the modelling but also the customer entertainment!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope the Antarctic Pilots will get some Canada Goose Jackets, it's hard being a pilot down south or up north.
Like the guys at AWI said: Cockpit (+30°C) - Tail section (-20°C) :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing i want to see in the extended version of the twin otter is the flap gauge stop exactly at 10,20.30,and 40 degrees detente and not between 10 and 20 degrees and then between 20 and 30 degrees like on the old twin otter. Finn can we make shore that 40 degrees of flap is exactly 40 degrees down. just some thoughts. the plane looks great great job guys! i wish i had payed more attention in math and went to college so i could help you with code . i did not go to college thought so i can only tell you things based on be old twin otter x that i fly all the time.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing i want to see in the extended version of the twin otter is the flap gauge stop exactly at 10,20.30,and 40 degrees detente and not between 10 and 20 degrees and then between 20 and 30 degrees like on the old twin otter. Finn can we make shore that 40 degrees of flap is exactly 40 degrees down. just some thoughts. the plane looks great great job guys! i wish i had payed more attention in math and went to college so i could help you with code . i did not go to college thought so i can only tell you things based on be old twin otter x that i fly all the time.

Already done ;)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing i want to see in the extended version of the twin otter is the flap gauge stop exactly at 10,20.30,and 40 degrees detente and not between 10 and 20 degrees and then between 20 and 30 degrees like on the old twin otter. Finn can we make shore that 40 degrees of flap is exactly 40 degrees down. just some thoughts. the plane looks great great job guys! i wish i had payed more attention in math and went to college so i could help you with code . i did not go to college thought so i can only tell you things based on be old twin otter x that i fly all the time.

As Kyle said - it´s allready done.

But You won´t see 40° since the highest flap setting is 37.5°.

Finn

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With my question about what logic was behind the assumption that more testers would lead to a faster release, or a release with less bugs I meant the following:

To test an addon You really need some diversity among the testers. To find issues that are casued by various types of hardware and software there must be a broad selection of testers with different setups.

Issues we have seen during the years are:

-Different GPU's

-Different Joysticks and controllers

-Different drivers

-Different OS versions and languages (Win XP 32/64 bit, Vista 32/64 bit, Windows 7 in all it's many versions and Windows 8) - combine this with different GPU's and driver versions.

-Different versions of FS i.e FSX SP2, FSX Acceleration & P3D

-A ton of different addon utilities like weather, Camera, Online programs etc...

-Different FS install locations (Programs(X86) is generally deemed a bad place due to UAC).

As You can see - it would almost be impossible to get enough testers to cover all the combinations possible with the above, and certain combinations often surprices us and cannot be found before released to a broader audience.

Next thing is the skill level of the testers...

You would probably think that having real pilots, who fly the particular aircraft, would be the best thing to have.

ften they will act very much the same as in reallife i.e keep flying the aircraft safe and use proper procedures, they will find obvious bugs or wrong system logic as well as being very good to tell about the flightmodel but they often don´t find bugs caused by doing something "stupid".

Then there are the FS newbies, they are important too, cause they do things to the addon most of us hardly could think on, finding bugs that wouldn´t be revealed by doing things by the book.

Between these two segments comes the seasoned, and often hardcore, flightsimmers. They know about many of the issues that are present in FSX, as well as having a broad knowledge about aircrafts and aircraftsystems.

But none of the above types are any good if they cannot communicate in a way the developers can understand.

Reports like "The autopilot doesn´t work" is useless. It´s importent that they can tell the exact steps that lead to a certain issue.

Being a beta tester might sound very interesting, and most often it is. But it really demands that You are willing to run the same tests over and over again, maybe flying the exact same pattern, route or profile 10, 20 or more times.

Most people will loose patience long before reaching flight number 10.

Bottom line is that it´s really not the number of testers that matters, but rather the quality of the testing and communication between testers and developers.

Putting more testers on a project does not mean that testing can be done in a shorter time, cause the developers must also be able to cope with all the reports they get.

It´s very much like having 2 workers working in a small room on a job that normally requires 20 hours to get done.

Putting 20 workers on the same job won´t have it finished in 2 hours, cause there is simply no room for all those workers.

Back to the Twin Otter, where we still only are at "alpha" testing....

I can only say that the testers present are very good and gives superb feedback, so I´m sure that it will have a positive impact on the quality of the release version.

Finn

Hi Finn,

I think we are very close together. Only that I have not considered your last point (with the 20 guys in one room...).

Thanks for the insight!

Regards, Till

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, guys, I ve just started up the Antarctica version of the old Twin Otter and it hasnt been that much fun. You ve spoiled me that much with your preview material that I couldnt really enjoy ;)

I am really looking forward to the Conference on saturday and I hope I will get to see some Twin Otter stuff there :)

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if its 37.5 degrees why does the flap indicator say 40 degrees and the flap lever also says that ?

i learn something new every day. thanks for the info finn

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if its 37.5 degrees why does the flap indicator say 40 degrees and the flap lever also says that ?

i learn something new every day. thanks for the info finn

That is a good point. I have not been able to figure that one out, As i fly the twotter in real life for the Ontario Ministry of natural resources. The one i fly is on Amphibian float version with wheels, all all Love beta testing this one' when i am not at work about 5 hours a day is spent on the testing and feedback.

Regard Keith

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.