Jump to content

wehyam

Members
  • Content Count

    63
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About wehyam

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Airwork
  1. Hey ho Skybird4.. I read your 'article'.. I admire your patience with some of the responders.. reminds me of a quote... it went something like this "with stupidity even the gods struggle in vain".. However... I agree with much of what you say and I'm glad to see the real world pilots using it came to your rescue... In fact I've just updated my version.. I gave up gliding last year when I concentrated on trying to get my private pilots licence.. maybe time to start again.. I want to get a motor glider.. :roll: . !! BTW In my limited gliding experience I found ridge flying is th
  2. I already have Condor and 'used' it a couple of years ago as an first stage of learning to fly .. practicing 'coordinated turns and circuits'... for hours before moving 'real world'.. ... My only real objection to it is the scenery (its really artificial) and the one I suppose you cant complain about... there are no GA planes in it except tow-planes which the AI fly!! :roll: Also... my major enjoyment from sims is gained not from 'high tech and system flights.... although a bit of proper navex never hurts anyone.. :wink: but its the takeoff and landing on 'demanding' strips and the
  3. Thanks for that.. M.Lion... I read the article .. of course that's going to (already did) wind up the xplane supporters.. I'm looking to understand what is involved in 'tweaking' the planes parameters to give it the 'desired' behavious :roll: .. the article tried to find a set of 'behaviours' which the plane (C172) should have and rated the sims against them.. I was interested to see that the RealAir came of well.. What would have been nicer would have been some comparison of the parameters which showed/caused the differences.... At the moment X-plane is undergoing a bit of a 'wrigg
  4. Thanks Mathjis, I already have that book.. I was thinking more of a book that tells you how you 'do' flight sims, and how they work... How do you guys 'make' a plane... :wink: In X-plane there is a program.. Xplane maker which has a lot of boxes in which the builder types parameters ranging from Vne to the engine power, the coefficient of friction of the tyre, and the size of the water rudder etc etc.. Of course being X-plane the documentation is a bit sparse! and there are more than a few runes :roll: Anyway... I was wondering how it is done in FSX... and whether theres a ma
  5. Talking about flight models.. has anyone tried the SF260 from the Realair stable... :wink: I think it actually sideslips... and it can certainly spin.. sort of fun when its safe!
  6. hope so.. as long as they've noticed.. BUT of course I can always set the weather... the sun has got his hat on .. he's coming out today.. etc... regards
  7. Hey ho Ross.. Is there anything in the manual?
  8. Opened my mouth and jumped in.. I hadn't noticed the update.. :oops: BUT its still raining in Pemberton... nice sort of torquoise isnt it.. :cry:
  9. I suppose this must have been noted before.. The Katana in FSX with SP1 and SP2 has a reflective aluminum plate in the cockpit.. clearly something is happening in the wrong order.. I can fly it but why should I? :? Does anybody else get this bonus? So gush on Ross number mumble but what with the Dornier windscreen going opaque torquoise in the rain as well and the Katana metal finishing unfinished.. I'm completely underwhelmed with the Digital Aviation kit. (and of course FSX... ) They're back in the hangar....
  10. I've got the Shadetree beaver (and the FF & IP scenery packages).... Its not as nice candy as Aerosoft.. but at least its got a 2D panel so the Freda checks are easy!.. I've just been 'flying' the two.. I find them really quite difficult to compare ... marginally I prefer the FSX set up (Vancouver+ scenery) mainly because there seems to be less tree clutter so there are more 'fun' places to put the plane down... the major diffferenc between the planes is on the ground.. The ground handling of the FSX plane seems much 'weightier' with far less weather-vaning.. But I noticed another
  11. You raise some good points here Snafe but first... **** "You yourself cite a good example. Your FF stick absolutely sucks at representing the real forces in a real aircraft, but it's an entertainment product for an entertainment market. When I taxi a Cessna I don't feel the bumps on the tarmac through the yoke. Not ever. But those bumps are important to me in representing an aircraft travelling over a realistic surface in the sim and are a vital component in my enjoyment of the sim. **** Oh you are right... :wink: I turn all the forcefeedback boxes in FSX to OFF.. and use the MS s
  12. Sorry Snave, Metzger I got, Beckwith..? I dont know wherewhat 1% ? I think I'm half way agreeing with your disparagement of flight model purity per se.. 8) I suppose in Sim-world a key thing is whether the plane is sufficiently (in principle) controllable that it is worth the investment (time and $) to learn the handling foibles and the systems. I suppose the heavier the metal the relatively more important the systems become where as for light GA stuff the key 'enjoyment' is whether the plane can be controlled and its worth learning how to fly it so you can put your Super Cub down on
  13. Oh :cry: Maybe you could/should poll the 'readers' and see how many would pay in advance to have it.... :wink:
  14. If my earlier response appears .. sorry.. funger errirs... Thanks for the answer Mathjis.. .. I suppose the X-plane advantage is that if you dont like something you can 'relatively easily' modify it.. and of course you can specify what airfoil you want (which is an aswer to the sort of question I dont ask!!) BUT ... However.. this reminds me ... Mathjis are you (or Aerosoft) going to 'upgrade' the Supercub to SFX.. I remember you and David -Wi had something in the pot but it seems to have gone cold.. are you intending to do anything further or has it died?? regards ..
  15. I've just been on the X-plane Forum.. :? And frequently a topic boils up agonising about the accuracy or otherwise of the flight models. Much is made of the fact that in X-plane the plane is 'modelled' as collection of surfaces with aerodynamic properties. lift drag etc.. and the actual flight characteristics are computed 'real time' from the 'theory' ... you 'build' your plane with a wing in the wrong place and the plane flies like its got a wing in the wrong place! you want to add another wing and it will compute the lift drag etcetteras and ..etc... this is ideal for a community tha
×
×
  • Create New...