-
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
C-47 update
- Thread starter bazzar
- Start date
Manschy
SOH-CM-2023
Nearly patented "Smell-o-sim". Aerosol puffer loaded with Avgas driven by a servo linked to switch-code in the sim. Didn't go ahead after wife told me to stop being silly.
Nearly patented "Smell-o-sim". Aerosol puffer loaded with Avgas driven by a servo linked to switch-code in the sim. Didn't go ahead after wife told me to stop being silly.
I'll take one! Will there be a future add-on for burned oil odor too?
Obie311
Charter Member
Nearly patented "Smell-o-sim". Aerosol puffer loaded with Avgas driven by a servo linked to switch-code in the sim. Didn't go ahead after wife told me to stop being silly.
Sounds good to me. Don't forget to add a little essence of Skydrol to the mix.
bazzar
Charter Member 2018
That's not a Pratt & Whitney!
This is a Pratt & Whitney...
Sorry all you P&W fans, we got our Wrights mixed up with our lefts and created a bit of a hybrid. We inadvertently used a crankcase and a few other bits we had from a Wright Cyclone in another project to build the engines for the C-47/DC-3 project.
So we've scrapped it all and built a new P&W. We're about to test two of these in the C-47.
This is a Pratt & Whitney...
Sorry all you P&W fans, we got our Wrights mixed up with our lefts and created a bit of a hybrid. We inadvertently used a crankcase and a few other bits we had from a Wright Cyclone in another project to build the engines for the C-47/DC-3 project.
So we've scrapped it all and built a new P&W. We're about to test two of these in the C-47.
Attachments
bazzar
Charter Member 2018
Well. Manfred, your wish is our command... here are some WIP shots taken in P3DV4.5, showing the new P&Ws nice and snug in their cowlings with that tropical filter fitted, complete with the weld seam around the mouth...not very sophisticated but I guess it did the job.
Attachments
cavaricooper
SOH-CM-2023
Baz-
Following with piqued interest... any word on the FDE and it’s author yet? In the end it will be mostly about how she FLIES (for me anyhow).
She does look marvelous in Olive , although I am most interested in some civvi skins as the current C-47 is fairly fabulous... do share a couple of those when time permits please... that is what has been missing all these P3D years.
Ta- C
Following with piqued interest... any word on the FDE and it’s author yet? In the end it will be mostly about how she FLIES (for me anyhow).
She does look marvelous in Olive , although I am most interested in some civvi skins as the current C-47 is fairly fabulous... do share a couple of those when time permits please... that is what has been missing all these P3D years.
Ta- C
bazzar
Charter Member 2018
We are not really into naming authors of things like flight dynamics. Basically, the product will be built with the best FDs we can put into it. We usually try to have our products tested by people who have qualified time on type. Most end-users don't have any time on anything so they're guessing at how something should fly anyway.
cavaricooper
SOH-CM-2023
Wow- that set me back a bit mate... there are a few of us that have one or two (thousand) hours amongst us.... ah well... as they say, the proof will be in the pudding... fingers x’ed!
Ta- C
Ta- C
bazzar
Charter Member 2018
Shouldn't set you back at all. Sometimes we get the impression that the community would be happy with a cardboard box providing XXXXXXX (insert name of developer here) does the flight files. There are quite a number of excellent authors working in the field, many of whom we use and have used to produce files for us. They have done work for the well-known and respected names in the business and produced some of the best -selling add-ons. Yet, because their name is not XXXXXXX(insert name of developer here) they get trashed. Can you imagine how that might feel? As I have said, we usually ask people who have actual time on type to test for us. If they are happy, we are happy. If you have time on type, please drop me an email before the beta begins.
Alan_A
Charter Member
"You should definitely pay us money for this because good flight dynamicist we won't name and also tested by real pilots so trust us, and definitely don't annoy us by talking about the guy who did the free one we compete with and also works with PMDG because that shows you're just stupidly name-loyal and would be happy flying a cardboard box, which is probably fine because you have no time in type and can't judge anyway."
Um, quite a selling message there. Makes me all warm and fuzzy and ready to fork over cash.
Um, quite a selling message there. Makes me all warm and fuzzy and ready to fork over cash.
bazzar
Charter Member 2018
What an extraordinarily immature and un-considered outburst. What has what we ask for anything or whether we name our people or not got to do with it.
Cavaricooper has raised a point to which we have responded in a respectful manner, stating our case and also, if he has time on type, asked him to join us on the beta team.
We accept that there people out there who do not like to pay for others' work - that is their right. But we don't need childish outbursts like yours. If you look at the community right now, it is chock full of trolls and internet warriors with no idea of what goes into making these things and care even less. There is no respect for the people who do the work, their skills and their talent. And I am talking freeware and payware. Attitudes like that are what is surely going to kill this hobby.
I would suggest that you go back over this thread and have another think.
Cavaricooper has raised a point to which we have responded in a respectful manner, stating our case and also, if he has time on type, asked him to join us on the beta team.
We accept that there people out there who do not like to pay for others' work - that is their right. But we don't need childish outbursts like yours. If you look at the community right now, it is chock full of trolls and internet warriors with no idea of what goes into making these things and care even less. There is no respect for the people who do the work, their skills and their talent. And I am talking freeware and payware. Attitudes like that are what is surely going to kill this hobby.
I would suggest that you go back over this thread and have another think.
Alan_A
Charter Member
I'm sorry. Let me put it differently.
Speaking as a corporate public relations advisor of more than 30 years' experience - someone who ran the global technology practice for an international communications advisory firm - as well as a 30-year-plus participant in the hobby, with some experience as a beta tester - I found your response off the mark in both tone and substance. It seemed to me that you were unduly disparaging of both the community and a respected individual member of it - suggesting that both the collective and the person were excessively attracted to "big name" flight dynamicists, and unqualified to judge the work ("happy with a cardboard box," "most users don't have time on anything so they're guessing...")
Clearly you feel the way you so, as is your right. It may also be that the aggression I read your response isn't what you intended. I'll say this also - what I do for a living is much more an art than a science, so I may in fact be the one that's off base. However, for what it's worth, I did react badly, so perhaps that will register with you, too.
I'll say something else - it's all well and good to complain about the community and trolls, but this is the second time in less than a week that I've felt compelled to criticize the way a developer was addressing a customer. We're all stewards of the community, and responsibility is evenly distributed.
I do sincerely hope that the C-47 project comes off as well as you say it will, and if it does, I'll happily be a customer, if you'll have me as one.
Wishing you the best.
Speaking as a corporate public relations advisor of more than 30 years' experience - someone who ran the global technology practice for an international communications advisory firm - as well as a 30-year-plus participant in the hobby, with some experience as a beta tester - I found your response off the mark in both tone and substance. It seemed to me that you were unduly disparaging of both the community and a respected individual member of it - suggesting that both the collective and the person were excessively attracted to "big name" flight dynamicists, and unqualified to judge the work ("happy with a cardboard box," "most users don't have time on anything so they're guessing...")
Clearly you feel the way you so, as is your right. It may also be that the aggression I read your response isn't what you intended. I'll say this also - what I do for a living is much more an art than a science, so I may in fact be the one that's off base. However, for what it's worth, I did react badly, so perhaps that will register with you, too.
I'll say something else - it's all well and good to complain about the community and trolls, but this is the second time in less than a week that I've felt compelled to criticize the way a developer was addressing a customer. We're all stewards of the community, and responsibility is evenly distributed.
I do sincerely hope that the C-47 project comes off as well as you say it will, and if it does, I'll happily be a customer, if you'll have me as one.
Wishing you the best.
bazzar
Charter Member 2018
Thankyou Alan, I am sure you will agree we don't need "bickering" - it's time-wasting and non-productive. I have 36 years in international advertising agencies, myself and am well-acquainted with the marketing world. As for trolls etc. it is vital that developers have a right of reply to these people. We have been in business at AH for 20 years and whilst that is certainly not a reason to buy, surely it is worth something by way of respect or at least an acknowlegment that we may know what we are talking about.
Anyway, let's forget this silly moment and move on. Thanks again and regards.
Anyway, let's forget this silly moment and move on. Thanks again and regards.
Alan_A
Charter Member
Thanks, Baz, and to close it out I'll only say this - my initial reply wasn't exactly me at my best either. It's only fair that I critique mine, too. Happy to move on,
The positive take-away from all this is that people really, really care about the Dak - sometimes to the extent that we get carried away. But we're truly looking forward to it.
All best, again, and will stand by for more details as you're able to share them.
Best,
Alan
The positive take-away from all this is that people really, really care about the Dak - sometimes to the extent that we get carried away. But we're truly looking forward to it.
All best, again, and will stand by for more details as you're able to share them.
Best,
Alan
