N400QW
Charter Member
Sorry to hear that you consider our quality as Abacus quality but each to his own.:mixedsmi:
-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
IRIS Twin Star_"Deal or a Dud"?
- Thread starter falcon409
- Start date
- Status
Sorry to hear that you consider our quality as Abacus quality but each to his own.:mixedsmi:
AFAIK the HK36, DA20, DA40 and the DA42 are using a Wortmann FX 63-137 root and tip
Francois
FS Veteran
Of course..... and a forum can't show me grinning. 't was meant tongue-in -cheek. ;-)
N400QW
Charter Member
T'was mine as well Francois. Text hardly conveys the nuance of face to face conversation but your points are well received.
thunder100
Charter Member 2010
Hi
NO misunderstanding due to my poor english
As Owner of 8 ES products from Citation X v2 to my beloved Twin Comanche I do not regard Abacus and Eaglesoft on equal level.It just should show the path I took as ther was no other Twin Star for long time
Appologize if any ambarassment !!!!
Pls keep going
And maybe one day one makes a better Meridian
Roland
N400QW
Charter Member
Ah, yes I see your point now. You were outlining the fact that you have purchased the DA42 from Abacus, then the DA42 from Iris, and may consider the Eaglesoft DA42.
My apology to you for the misread and misunderstanding.
thunder100
Charter Member 2010
Ah, yes I see your point now. You were outlining the fact that you have purchased the DA42 from Abacus, then the DA42 from Iris, and may(WILL BUY) consider the Eaglesoft DA42.
My apology to you for the misread and misunderstanding.
Yes this was the idea
Roland
warchild
Charter Member
OK, well, I'll admitt that i didnt have any part in making the Iris DA-42 as i was focusing on the P-36 at the time. I know Davids work though, we all do. We've been flying his stuff for years, and have had loved it and well, not so loved it at times. None the less, We know Davids work. We all know it quite well and we know that he does the absolute best he can with what he's got. When it comes to the DA-42 what he had was himself, and a bunch of hackers that destroyed his site to contend with.. Considering that he has a Family, and he DOES pay his bills with this one source of income, I'd say that lesser people would have crumpled. Not David. He's still going strong, and right now doing his best to get his site put back together so we all have a place to gather and chat and enjoy some absolutely wonderful fun.
Admittedly i'm biased as hell.. David and Karen gave me a chance when no one else would have. because of that, theres a whole lot of you that have flown my work. He made it possible for me to do what i do, when all the other ego's running around out there would have just sloughed me off like yesterdays trash.
Maybe the FDE DOES need work. i dont know. i havent flown it. If he ever wants to have it tightened up, i'd be more than happy to do it.. Keep one thing in mind.. That flight model is not going to fly the same on any single machine as it does on the machine of the person who wrote it. Thats why i have the team i have. Our computers are so different that we spend months pulling out hair, and then get something that functions fairly well across the board. There is such a plaethora of different machines just in this forum alone its not funny.. You have I-7s, i-9s, Q9850s and 6600s, 2gigs 4 gigs 16 and 64 gigs, and every video card from an on board HP Nvidia set to something way beyond what i have ( a GTX-260 ). I mean jeeez guys.. Maybe David was a bit off his game. Most of us under those conditions wouldnt be in the game if that happened. Give the guy a break ok??
Pam
Admittedly i'm biased as hell.. David and Karen gave me a chance when no one else would have. because of that, theres a whole lot of you that have flown my work. He made it possible for me to do what i do, when all the other ego's running around out there would have just sloughed me off like yesterdays trash.
Maybe the FDE DOES need work. i dont know. i havent flown it. If he ever wants to have it tightened up, i'd be more than happy to do it.. Keep one thing in mind.. That flight model is not going to fly the same on any single machine as it does on the machine of the person who wrote it. Thats why i have the team i have. Our computers are so different that we spend months pulling out hair, and then get something that functions fairly well across the board. There is such a plaethora of different machines just in this forum alone its not funny.. You have I-7s, i-9s, Q9850s and 6600s, 2gigs 4 gigs 16 and 64 gigs, and every video card from an on board HP Nvidia set to something way beyond what i have ( a GTX-260 ). I mean jeeez guys.. Maybe David was a bit off his game. Most of us under those conditions wouldnt be in the game if that happened. Give the guy a break ok??
Pam
N400QW
Charter Member
Hmm, not familiar with your work so can't speak to that.
Don't know David and Karen but from your description they sound like decent and hardworking folks who are dedicated to their projects.
That said, I would like to ask why you've stated that an FDE is different from machine to machine?
From our own experience an FDE file is no different from from machine to machine.
Obviously there will be performance differences in terms of FPS, etc. from a users perspective based on hardware and settings from machine to machine but no difference in the FDE file parameters?
Please clarify if you are inclined to do so.:salute:
Pam you sound as if you disapprove of people having problems with the product. I hate to be blunt but this is a payware aircraft, and I expect quality and proper beta testing.
Once again I hate to say it but the 'give the guy a break' reason doesn't stand with me. It didn't have to be released when it did, and it certainly could have gone through better beta testing.
I'm sure you guys at IRIS will sort out any problems in due time, but you can't say 'jeez guys' when people get frustrated after spending hard earned money on a product then find it substandard. At the moment we've paid you guys to write our own flight dynamics. Also, computer hardware has no impact at all on FDE's - but perhaps I misunderstand your point.
If I was in a restaurant and was given a substandard meal, then after complaining got told to give the guy a break, I'd walk off without paying or demand my money back. Same with any other thing I've ever purchased. This is no different!
Look forward to the issues being resolved, in the meantime I'm going to fire up the F-16 and the Vulcan!
Regards.
warchild
Charter Member
I'm not at Iris. I have my own group and iris sometimes contracts us to do their flight models...
yes, the flight model files are identical from machine to machine, but what each machine does with them is totally different. My Q6600 and i780 motherboard handles instructions and data a WHOLE lot diferently than someones I-7 or I-9 or even more so, the AMDs with the ATI radeons on them. A fine example of that can be seen in the Vsync thread elsewhere on this forum. Yes, those DO factor into performance, as does the person sitting behind the joystick ( which itself has significant effect ).
And yes. Give the guy a break. You'd want one if you were in his shoes, so would I. Payware or not. sheesh.
A little qualifier here. My Last job in real life was as an IT manager for a company called Cradle technologies. They started life as a chip manufacturer. I believe i understand just a little bit about the way instructions and data are handled across different hardware platforms. Cradle got out of the chip industry partly becausr of the way different boards handled the same data differently. Odd thing was is theres very little difference between the boards they were applying the chip too, but it was enough that the chip failed. Now they make video surveillance systems..
falcon409
SOH-CM-2025
Do we have any Diamond TwinStar Test Pilots here? Do we have any Diamond TwinStar Flight Instructors with us? Do we have even a few TwinStar owners among us who can speak from experience on the comparisons between the current IRIS flight model and the actual aircraft?
Probably not, yet everyone's a friggin expert. If you've never flown the airplane you have no basis on which to challenge the "flyability" of this aircraft or any other. Despite the fact that I've mentioned twice in this thread that with realism settings almost maxed out, I've had no problems taxiing, taking off, flying or landing this airplane. . .yet for some, with an agenda, those statements seemed to have been missed or dismissed completely because they didn't coincide with their opinion.
I can't speak to Pam's statement about the FDE fluctuating between machines on the basis of the type of machine, but to think that the FDE also doesn't fluctuate based on individual settings on various machines would be a mistake. Every individual tweaks his realism settings differently, those settings will affect the way the aircraft performs. Who knows, maybe Pam's on to something actually. . .why else would someone who paid $2000 for a machine to run FSX at it's best swear it still doesn't run FSX the way "he/she" thinks it should and I have a machine I paid less than $500 for two years ago and it runs FSX with most sliders maxed at an average of 20 to 25fps? It's what we do to it. . .or try to do after we get it that can make it or break it.
If your TwinStar isn't performing as "you" think it should, maybe it isn't the FDE at all.
Probably not, yet everyone's a friggin expert. If you've never flown the airplane you have no basis on which to challenge the "flyability" of this aircraft or any other. Despite the fact that I've mentioned twice in this thread that with realism settings almost maxed out, I've had no problems taxiing, taking off, flying or landing this airplane. . .yet for some, with an agenda, those statements seemed to have been missed or dismissed completely because they didn't coincide with their opinion.
I can't speak to Pam's statement about the FDE fluctuating between machines on the basis of the type of machine, but to think that the FDE also doesn't fluctuate based on individual settings on various machines would be a mistake. Every individual tweaks his realism settings differently, those settings will affect the way the aircraft performs. Who knows, maybe Pam's on to something actually. . .why else would someone who paid $2000 for a machine to run FSX at it's best swear it still doesn't run FSX the way "he/she" thinks it should and I have a machine I paid less than $500 for two years ago and it runs FSX with most sliders maxed at an average of 20 to 25fps? It's what we do to it. . .or try to do after we get it that can make it or break it.
If your TwinStar isn't performing as "you" think it should, maybe it isn't the FDE at all.
srgalahad
Charter Member 2022
Skittles, this isn't in response to you, just the (common) opinions you express - consider it a group hug.
One of the most misused and mistaken business policies is "the customer is always right" - created by businesses who were afraid to lose customers to the competition in a time of economic growth.
I don't disapprove of people having product issues. However the 'freedom of speech' that comes with the internet has taken a turn for the worse... every day we see people who hop onto forums and for their moment of fame voice opinions. Do they ever show their qualifications?
Have they any (in this case) real-world flight experience to compare to the model? Have they researched the real plane to determine if a 'fault' in the model might be a real aircraft issue? (Remember the Martin B-26> It was considered a death trap until pilots were taught it's quirks as a high performance airframe, or the deadly F-104 -with almost no wing at all?) Have they decent equipment equal to the task (the $25 joystick and no rudder pedals is no way to judge a helicopter's flight characteristics unless the target market is the lowest common denominator)? have they properly calibrated their human interface devices? Yes to all the above? OK
... but then have they first, before blowing something off in a public forum contacted the modeler to determine if he/she is aware of the 'flaw' and if skilled in FDE design, offered suggestions for a 'fix'? If "yes" and the poster is willing to document that then I'll say they can flap their gums with some justification and maybe even my support. If no, then I'd like to see the badge of superiority they got in their Cracker Jack box.
Sadly, a lot of customers want authenticity but rant about the faulty steering (because it has no steering but differential brakes/power), the huge amount of runway the model uses (without reading historical documents that the aircraft was underpowered for the first 5 years of it's production), etc. etc. Others expect version specific models (but don't charge me extra).
The most telling point is that the average customer who rants, complains, whines or belittles rarely says "thank you for this, but I noticed..." - it's more often "this is a piece of crap" without a hint of politeness or respect for the fact that the modeler (and/or team) has spent hundreds or thousands of hours bringing to market something that people whined for because it was otherwise unavailable. Maybe, just maybe, if it was a $250 add-on I'd be more tolerant but in most cases it's a weekend's worth of beer or half that crummy meal in the restaurant.
That's not to say every model is perfect. A lot have flaws and some get fixed more rapidly than others -more often than not because someone contacted the dev. and offered data or help. On the basis of perfection as a standard however, there wouldn't be ANY payware and then where would we be? There's not a lot of free stuff coming out for any sim., and esp. FSX.
Somewhere at the top of the Outhouse forum page there's a line that says:
Let Being Helpful Be More Important Than Being Right!
Somehow I don't see unsubstantiated complaints by persons sheltered by 'usernames' in a forum the developer may not even read as being 'helpful'.
BTW, this particular model/discussion/thread is a lot more gentle and friendly than many... some have almost made me vomit - it just happens to be the topic du jour. Don't take it as personally folks. It's my day for waxing philosophical.
(Remember Mike Stone!)
Rob
One of the most misused and mistaken business policies is "the customer is always right" - created by businesses who were afraid to lose customers to the competition in a time of economic growth.
I don't disapprove of people having product issues. However the 'freedom of speech' that comes with the internet has taken a turn for the worse... every day we see people who hop onto forums and for their moment of fame voice opinions. Do they ever show their qualifications?
Have they any (in this case) real-world flight experience to compare to the model? Have they researched the real plane to determine if a 'fault' in the model might be a real aircraft issue? (Remember the Martin B-26> It was considered a death trap until pilots were taught it's quirks as a high performance airframe, or the deadly F-104 -with almost no wing at all?) Have they decent equipment equal to the task (the $25 joystick and no rudder pedals is no way to judge a helicopter's flight characteristics unless the target market is the lowest common denominator)? have they properly calibrated their human interface devices? Yes to all the above? OK
... but then have they first, before blowing something off in a public forum contacted the modeler to determine if he/she is aware of the 'flaw' and if skilled in FDE design, offered suggestions for a 'fix'? If "yes" and the poster is willing to document that then I'll say they can flap their gums with some justification and maybe even my support. If no, then I'd like to see the badge of superiority they got in their Cracker Jack box.
Sadly, a lot of customers want authenticity but rant about the faulty steering (because it has no steering but differential brakes/power), the huge amount of runway the model uses (without reading historical documents that the aircraft was underpowered for the first 5 years of it's production), etc. etc. Others expect version specific models (but don't charge me extra).
The most telling point is that the average customer who rants, complains, whines or belittles rarely says "thank you for this, but I noticed..." - it's more often "this is a piece of crap" without a hint of politeness or respect for the fact that the modeler (and/or team) has spent hundreds or thousands of hours bringing to market something that people whined for because it was otherwise unavailable. Maybe, just maybe, if it was a $250 add-on I'd be more tolerant but in most cases it's a weekend's worth of beer or half that crummy meal in the restaurant.
That's not to say every model is perfect. A lot have flaws and some get fixed more rapidly than others -more often than not because someone contacted the dev. and offered data or help. On the basis of perfection as a standard however, there wouldn't be ANY payware and then where would we be? There's not a lot of free stuff coming out for any sim., and esp. FSX.
Somewhere at the top of the Outhouse forum page there's a line that says:
Let Being Helpful Be More Important Than Being Right!
Somehow I don't see unsubstantiated complaints by persons sheltered by 'usernames' in a forum the developer may not even read as being 'helpful'.
BTW, this particular model/discussion/thread is a lot more gentle and friendly than many... some have almost made me vomit - it just happens to be the topic du jour. Don't take it as personally folks. It's my day for waxing philosophical.
(Remember Mike Stone!)
Rob
Note: This post is NOT about the Iris Twin Star - I'm talking in general terms
I've been typing bits out and deleting them for 10 minutes now. At the end of the day, regardless of whether a concern is valid, if it is expressed politely, as it has been in this thread and in threads around the community, getting told to 'give the guy a break' is the wrong way to go about things in my opinion.
Flight sim developers are not a special breed in terms of business practise. I hold them to the same standards that I hold any other business. Now I know Pam isn't really representing the project (I thought she worked for Iris full time) it's not the same, but since I made my original post I think it was worth explaining.
Mike Stone was purely a freeware dev as far as I'm aware. I don't like people who criticise freeware, but if you're taking money for a product then the product has to be worthy, if not, and for good reason, my word will I complain about it.
And just so we're clear when I say 'for good reason' I mean for good reason. In another thread yesterday I mentioned how one chap was complaining about how in the Lotus L-39 the screen went black above 24,000ft, and that this was a fault. Not quite mate. Turn on your oxygen. This doesn't qualify as 'good reason.'
It all boils down to this - if I was working in a store, as I often have, and upon receiving a complaint replied 'jeez, give me a break' I'd be in a whole heap of trouble
I've been typing bits out and deleting them for 10 minutes now. At the end of the day, regardless of whether a concern is valid, if it is expressed politely, as it has been in this thread and in threads around the community, getting told to 'give the guy a break' is the wrong way to go about things in my opinion.
Flight sim developers are not a special breed in terms of business practise. I hold them to the same standards that I hold any other business. Now I know Pam isn't really representing the project (I thought she worked for Iris full time) it's not the same, but since I made my original post I think it was worth explaining.
I disagree with this actually. I think the point holds if it is freeware - where you get what you are given and you are happy with it. If you are not happy with it you can stick it up your jacksie! Payware however, is completely different in my opinion. You are paying your own money for a flight sim aircraft. For that money you expect certain things, and as long as you don't have an 'agenda' as is so often brought up, even harsh comments are fair game in my opinion, as long as they are justified (barring personal attacks etc).
Mike Stone was purely a freeware dev as far as I'm aware. I don't like people who criticise freeware, but if you're taking money for a product then the product has to be worthy, if not, and for good reason, my word will I complain about it.
And just so we're clear when I say 'for good reason' I mean for good reason. In another thread yesterday I mentioned how one chap was complaining about how in the Lotus L-39 the screen went black above 24,000ft, and that this was a fault. Not quite mate. Turn on your oxygen. This doesn't qualify as 'good reason.'
It all boils down to this - if I was working in a store, as I often have, and upon receiving a complaint replied 'jeez, give me a break' I'd be in a whole heap of trouble
N400QW
Charter Member
We do have a number of real world DA42 Pilots on our Beta Test list. One of whom has already pronounced our FDE "spot on" on the numbers and Flight Envelope.
While it may be true, and I emphasize "may be", that there might be slight differences from machine to machine for a given FDE there is no way that a faulty FDE will suddenly turn into a great FDE on certain hardware a settings.
What I am conveying is that an FDE which does not hit the numbers or does not have the proper "feel" is not going to suddenly change into a proper FDE with a different machine.
warchild
Charter Member
Note: This post is NOT about the Iris Twin Star - I'm talking in general terms
if I was working in a store, as I often have, and upon receiving a complaint replied 'jeez, give me a break' I'd be in a whole heap of trouble
Yes, but please understand. He never asked for a break. I asked.. Yes, its true. if your working in a store selling stuff made on a production line and you arent up to snuff because your having a bad time in life, they would fire you. I know they ( whoever "they" are ) did it to me several times.. And in a community which is dwindling, and faced with an uncertain future as is, we have become even more stringent and critical than we have been in the past..
Forgive me.. I'm simply being humanistic. I know real life isnt a nice place ( all too well ), but still, it never will be unless we realize that these planes ( nor the rest of the world ) dont come from factories. they come from individual people like you and me. there is no production line. Just guys and gals sitting there day after day, hoping that someone will find something enjoyable about their work..
We all have bad times in life, and yeah. If you had been one of my employees, I'd have given you the benefit of the doubt, and gone easy on you..
Always:
Pam
warchild
Charter Member
I would completely and 100% agree ( yes, i'm being redundant ) if it wasnt for one thing.. When i first began work on the P-36 after reinstalling FSx, it ran fantastically on my machine.. On my partners machine however, it was completely and utterly uncontrollable.. Reason?/ my sliders reset to default.. i was a dummy.. But i'm not the only person who has done this.. and it can happen on any machine.. I would normally create a model that will fly properly with the reality sliders pushed to their limit.. but if i make an airplane that flights exactly correctly with the sliders at their default, i may end up the only person in the world who can fly it.. I'm not saying thats what happened. I honestly havent seen the FDE myself, but its a possibility,.. and it does significantly change the way the flight model works from on machine to another.. Just change he reality settings..
N400QW
Charter Member
Allow me to suggest a better way Pam.
All aircraft have a "flight envelope" and a set of performance numbers.
Proper engineering requires a baseline "neutral" setup on the development rig.
As you know, the rest is a matter of factor adjustments between the airfile and the aircraft.cfg to obtain both the "numbers" and the "flight envelope".
It is quite possible to achieve the feel of the "envelope" and miss on the "numbers" and vice versa.
In no case can taking a poor file set to a different machine improve the basic characteristics of a poor file set any more than taking a great file set to a poor machine diminish the great file set.:salute:
warchild
Charter Member
'Improve? No.. I agree with you.. Intensify whats wrong?? Oh yes.. My Poor partner and lucky me.. I'd probably be dead if he wetrent in england and i in the PNW.. I put him through hell for a few days till i got as clue.. and the stuff that drove him nuts was done when the reality controls were at neutral, the default reality setings.. Thats why i always develope ( or try to always develope ) with all my reality settings turned up all the way.. people can always dial them down to their liking if they wish.. Like i said. i didnt do the 42s fde. if i had, i dont know.. maybe it would have been different, maybe it wouldnt.. depends on what David would have wanted..
another thing i try to keep in mind. not everyone is developing for the museum market. some people want to build a simple, fun to fly and enjoyable plane.. No harm there.. A plane is what it is. we may like it or not, but no matter that, because what we expect and what the designer wanted may be two completely different things. I personally try to build museum pieces. i dont always enjoy it because it takes nine months to a year, but thats what i start with. Every number has to be correct, and ya know what drives me crazy?? they never are and i'll tell ya why. because i dont have access to the original design. All i ever have are three views and if i'm lucky, blueprints. If i'm real lucky i have a pilots testimony, which covers about a part of the entire plane, but only a part, no matter how much information that pilot gives me, because personal experience is always subjective, and pilots, being human, can only give me subjective feedback.. Unless i can get my hands on exact empirical data, i have to accept that no matter how any of us try, our work is not accurate. So if my work isnt accurate, who am i to judge someone else??
We all simply do the best we can with what we have eh??
- Status