DC Phantom page up at JustFlight

Status
Not open for further replies.
As mentioned folks, I no longer enter debates into such things, and the reasoning for that is clear by the exchange here. The images grabbed from 3D models on Turbosquid are presented in an orthographic 3D fashion, which is mostly used in the design phase and is not true 3D ( best used for side, overhead, front and back when building models ) so they're not representative of any model's true shape. Also, some of the "evidence" used compares noses of entirely different variants with each other, hardly a great example of what they "should" be. As I already posted an image of my F-4E against a true orthographic image F-4E to show how closely the nose is shaped to the real thing, there is no further debate needed there. In addition, neither the C nor D models are featured in the package and my own screenshots featured here, while zoomed as best I can, tend to warp the nose of an aircraft slightly at most angles. I have two former F4 Phantom crews helping with the models - neither has suggested they're inaccurate in any way. That doesn't mean they aren't out - or that they can't be tweaked in the future, but I already mentioned such things. Likewise, the disingenuous comments about putting a "washing machine" instead show why I no longer bother much with social media debate about these sorts of things, people deliberately take any comment out of context in order to form an entirely irrelevant opinion. Likewise, liveries are not model shapes.As noted, my products improve over time, again already mentioned. Everything I've ever launched for flight sim kicks off with a product to please the masses, not the perfectionists in any sense at all. Refinements then follow in updates that increase detail and accuracy in ever greater measure. It's a business model that has been so successful that I have been able to effectively retire at just 50 years old ( I still work of course, as I love the work, but I no longer need to ). Internet debates tend to become endless, hence why I have gradually removed myself from most forums as there is little business requirement for it any more - the marketplace itself shows me what the audience wants, and 90% + certainly are more than happy with my products. That's how successful businesses run - you "listen" to the silent majority, not the vocal minority.
 
I've been waiting for a Phantom to be available for the new sim, but I'm afraid I have to agree with YoYo and Jmig.

In all this time, the only E model phantom with a decent nose that I've seen was the Cloud9 model in FS2004.

Priller
 
Well it's a day 1 purchase for me, irrespective of a nose profile that might be slightly questionable :)
I'm happy flying for instance the Swissmilsim Venom despite that having a completely incorrect Pinocchio nose for the RAF/RNZAF repaints I've uploaded to F.to and have been downloaded by many people.

When I first started doing repaints it was just wings (visible from the cockpit) and cockpit interior, but the bug bit :)
 
It’s hard to argue with Dean here. While I have a different point of view on the shape of things,
the overall product is always good.
I argued at length with DC on the Stearman and probably crossed the line of decorum a couple years f times. I expressed my opinion on both the shape and the flying qualities of the airplane to Dean and to ‘Codename Jack’ and you know what they did? They reached out to me in PM and offered to hear me out at length - possibly implementing some of the suggestions I put forward. Very gracious in light of the earlier comments I had made publicly.
I’m not saying that would happen again or often, but it did on that product that time - and they didn’t have to do that.
I know how some of you feel about this jet - same as I feel about the Stearman Kaydet.
These forums are one of the few places we aviation enthusiasts can go where we can express this enthusiasm and be properly heard - where our accumulated knowledge is appreciated, mostly.
The point is, DC Designs has done good work and listened to the community - as their previous works can attest.
 
Personally, I hardly ever criticize devs for their work, and I NEVER criticize freeware devs. But in my humble opinion, whenever money is asked for a product, then constructive criticism is justified.

I don't think the errors in the shape of the nose of that J model (and therefor the FGR.Mk.II) are that difficult to rectify, but the nose of that E model is just wrong. The fact that Dean doesn't even want to discuss it with the SOH community, is quite frankly disheartening.

I own every item in the MSFS catalogue of DC Designs and SC Designs, fly them regularly and love them, but I'm just not spending my hard earned cash on a Phantom that doesn't look like one. My bad luck? My favourite model is the E/F model...

Priller
 
Last edited:
Personally, I hardly ever criticize devs for their work, and I NEVER criticize freeware devs. But in my humble opinion, whenever money is asked for a product, then constructive criticism is justified.

I don't think the errors in the shape of the nose of that J model (and therefor the FGR.Mk.II) are that difficult to rectify, but the nose of that E model is just wrong. The fact that Dean doesn't even want to discuss it with the SOH community, is quite frankly disheartening.

I own every item in the MSFS catalogue of DC Designs and SC Designs, fly them regularly and love them, but I'm just not spending my hard earned cash on a Phantom that doesn't look like one. My bad luck? My favourite model is the E/F model...

Priller

I have to agree with this and many other posters. If there is simply a refusal to recognize the problem, then that is a bigger problem. The jet is not yet released and every post DCD has on the Phantom says WIP. So I’m hoping he will address this oversight and give this jet the due diligence it deserves.
 
Dean, always remember: "Illegitimi non carborundum!"

As for the rest of this thread, I'm going to close it to prevent further escalation. Some comments have been respectful, some, well...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top