Heinkel He100 D new model project.

[huub vink]

For once I'm a nearly speechless here.

Papi,

When my granddaughter makes me a drawing, it isn't a Rembrandt nor a Picasso, in most cases I don't even recognise what has been drawn. Nevertheless I always appreciate the gift and the fact she has done the effort for me.

This Heinkel He100 is perhaps not perfect but I don't have any doubt about what it resembles. When you don't like, fine! Everybody is allowed to have his or her own opinion. But there is absolutely no need to spit on it.
At least have some respect for the many hours somebody has put in it and enjoy the fact he considers you important enough to create this gift for you.

Claiming that it doesn't fly realistic has about the same value as claiming chicken doesn't taste like a rooster. When my calculations are right you were born nearly 15 years after the last He100D has flown, so your level of experience of flying a He100 is about the same as mine. And you should also be wondering whether a 50 Euro flight simulator can provide an authentic flying experience, or whether you should consider it not more than just an entertaining game.

So I challenge you, when you can do better than Chris and Shessi, please do. If not, show the respect somebody deserves, as they can do better than you.

Huub

 

[wombat666]

"For once I'm a nearly speechless here."

I can only echo Huub's words and sentiment.
This is not in the spirit FS2004 forum at all and despite my very limited grasp of the language I must say how surprised I am that it is coming from one of our SOH stalwarts.

 

[michaelvader]

Please excuse me I was too eexpressive

Hallo Huub, Hallo Shessi,
at first I will try to excuse me for my last post.
I wrote it just after I had a look in the aircraft.cfg.
I wrote it in german as I wanted so the text a bit lesser hard.
Allright I recognized I did an over shoot.
And all my RESPECTS To Shessi and Chris Lampard !
I have to be thankfull they gave us so nice models
So I will try to explain in a political correct way my thoughts
1. what I do not understand are mainly the aircraft.cfg, why was this done as it was done?
I believe it would take me about one day to make the aircraft.cfg "glue" to the model and
it is to say that I'm not a specialist for this part
2. why was in the original aicraft.cfg the engine have 18 cylinders and 2800 hpP
that this is completely wrong and is clearly visible for some one working on ac
like this.
that is just one example
3. concerning the flight behaviour, hmmm when I choose a special aircraft, it is not only to see it
but also to "feel it as was a plane like this one and not a lambda one
I recognize that this part is very difficult to work on.
For the moment I try to tame the Junkers Ju 88C and brrr a hard and time taking work
4. In all, to a nice and fine model I want also a nice aircraft cfg,
that the main things as engine and dimensions would be matching the concerned model
I will try to give an example: when you sit in a Audi A6 you would be certainly disapointed if
you see that the body is an A6 but und er it is a technique that is not even from a Golf.
5. Concerning the panel I admitted from my self that I was not the author of the original Background bmp
And of course if I believe I could do things better I can try to do so.
But this is the point I will not play the fifth wheel of the car nor to be mr. professor who lifts his finger to say I know it better
Concusion:
Please excuse me of my too hard words written under first emotion
All my respects to Shessi and Chris Lampard
And my greatest thanks to them to hold high the flagg of FS2004 aircraft
Yours
Papi

 

[Chris Lampard]

The foregoing comments for me illustrate perfectly why I choose to keep an ultra low profile on this site. As far as I am concerned, if a model looks right
externally, performs as accurately as possible and sounds more or less right that is good enough for me. What goes on behind the scenes in the .cfg and
.air files is subject to very limited tailoring in the first instance partly due to ignorance, but also total disbelief that it is necessary to get many hundreds
of often unintelligible conflicting parameters in two separate files absolutely correct to reflect reality. Let's face it, we are talking about Airfix, Revell
(whatever, your choice) kits built totally from scratch with excellent computer software that actually fly. My shell now awaits!!

 

[wbuchart]

Hi Chris and Shessi,

I agree with you completely. With the greatest respect to you and all developers who's work I've downloaded, I almost always make some changes to the config files to suit me anyway, and what suits me has nothing to do with what the actual specs are, many times (like you said here) we don't even know what the specs truly are. I do want you to know I do very much like the He 100, its a perfect model for me (I like to fly short hops just to look at the aircraft from the tower view) and am currently having a lot of fun with it.

So yet again you've made an "old man" very happy.

Thank You,
Bill

PS when I say perfect for me, I mean perfect for just about all of us

 

[Shessi]

Hi Folks,
Firstly thanks for the concerned comments, appreciated, and now you've also heard from the 'boss'...

I'm an old-bold soldier with thick skin, so it would take a lot more than Papi's comments to get to me, and I'm sure Chris is the same.

None of what I/we put up to fly is perfect, never said it was, and is certainly not beyond criticism, but if you have something more than constructive criticism to say please either PM or email me, I do want to hear it, as we can all learn and improve on things.

I appreciate your apologies Papi, no offence and no harm done, but please think before pressing that submit reply button!

As Wombat says, we're better than that here at Fs2004, so let's put it to bed and move on, thanks.



Shessi

 

[michaelvader]

translation needed

Hallo,
I found a booklet abput the He 100 but it is written what I believe to be polish language
so can some one just trans late me this little part please?
Yours
Papi

 

[huub vink]

Hi Chris,

Welcome to this forum. Absolutely no need to avoid it and it is nice to have a legend from the old days among us. I can assure you, we all appreciate what you are doing for us, although we sometimes express this is a somewhat strange way.

And concerning the He100D..... The unavoidable has already started!

Cheers,
Huub

 

[Mick]

Chris's comments reminded me of an old saying we had in plastic modeling, long before there was any such thing as digital modeling:

"If it looks right, it is right."

Of course in plastic, looks are all we have. Digital models have to fly too. But can any digital model fly like the real plane? Anyone who's ever flown a real plane, even dilettantes like me who only ever flew a few light planes and not for very many years, knows that "as real as it gets" isn't very real at all. Is it even possible for a virtual model to fly in FS quite like a real plane flies in the real air? I doubt it!

The He.100D looks right to me. Whether it flies right is something we will never know and which probably isn't even exactly possible.

I'm very pleased to have the model.

Thanks Chris and Mark!

 

[michaelvader]

real or not real

Hallo friends,
real or not real this is question.
At first concerning the aircraft.cfg
there must be made differencies between the datas which are historicly sure as the dimensions, engine datas, and landing gear mesures
These datas can be considered as sure as they are avaible from technical publications
than we have datas which influence the performance and flight behaviour and that is realy very difficult
Luckely today a lot of datas about WW II aircraft tests are avaible
So we can today aproach a lot to the real planes behaviour. I say aproach necause if you look only at the Me 262. there have been many variants
and the specific aircrafts differed some times a lot due to changing manufacturing quality in war time production conditions
So I spend a lot of time to collect documents about the tests and than translate them to the modelled aircraft
I know I am like a rivets counter concerning the aircrafts behaviour. But would it not be interesting when you have both a Bf 109 E and the Heinkel He 100D
to see their differencies when you fly them? When with a friend you fly together, which air craft would have been more dangerous for the spitfire, the 109 or the 100?
Ok of course I admit that there are a lot of pilots who see the things quiet different and "cooler"
From my part I like to go to the limits FS2004 and try to come to aproach as it might be possible to the real aircraft
I certainly do not pretend to be the only one to be right oh no!
Shessi sended me a very kind mail with a very good idea how to satisfy both points of view
We work on it - thanks Shessi
Yours
Papi

 

[Chris Lampard]

Briefly, supportive comment from all sources is very much appreciated, thank you all. My shell awaits, again!

 

[rgatkinson]

Thank you

First and foremost my sincere thanks to Shessi and Chris for making this aircraft available, especially for FS9! As for the comments made about the flight model - everyone is entitled to an opinion but tact and diplomacy are important qualities when voicing said opinion. SOH is a community and one of the great things about a community is that we can all support, encourage and contribute. Some by creating excellent skins, some by creating panels, some by tweaking and perfecting the flight model and some by just saying "Thank You". I was always told, treat people as you'd like to be treated yourself and you won't go far wrong in life.

Taff

 

[SteveB]

As an old and unfortunately Bald soldier, let me say thank you for the models, they have kept me busy during the lockdowns.

Steve

 

[wbuchart]

And a little off topic, in looking for the Tu-2 repaints (in as much as I looked where it was posted to look ) I found not only the Tu-2 but a treasure trove of repaints for a lot of aircraft I have, this will keep ME busy for a little bit, so Thank YOU, SteveB. I still fly FS9 so everything fairly new is a gift.....

 

[greycap]

models

Chris's comments reminded me of an old saying we had in plastic modeling, long before there was any such thing as digital modeling:

"If it looks right, it is right."

Of course in plastic, looks are all we have. Digital models have to fly too. But can any digital model fly like the real plane? Anyone who's ever flown a real plane, even dilettantes like me who only ever flew a few light planes and not for very many years, knows that "as real as it gets" isn't very real at all. Is it even possible for a virtual model to fly in FS quite like a real plane flies in the real air? I doubt it!

The He.100D looks right to me. Whether it flies right is something we will never know and which probably isn't even exactly possible.

I'm very pleased to have the model.

Thanks Chris and Mark!

hi. I have made plastic models for 60 years and there are always 'rivet counters' most don't get things done. i always try to do my best on each model. as for flight sim I am hugely disappointed when there are no new airplanes to fly in fs 2004 daily . as for internal files etc I could use the same files with tweaks for all my warbirds.I do find a lot of sounds arnt that real sounding.but, I love charging around the sky.long live fs2004

 

[Shessi]

''....... I love charging around the sky.long live fs2004 ...''

Hurrah! too damn right GC!!

And thanks for the positive comments all, certainly appreciated, and Chris will appreciate them aswell.

Cheers

Shessi

 

[Motormouse]

Papi,

IIRC the engine cylinders and horsepower figures
In the aircraft.cfg file mainly affect how the sounds are presented, things like propellor efficiency and angles will more directly affect how it ' flies' , but only when paired with a matching flight dynamics .Air file, as the .Air file overrides a lot of what is written in the cfg file.

If you want to change behaviour then best thing to adjust
Are the various scalars in the .cfg file, these DO make a difference. I'm working away this week, on real aeroplane work, so not able to check things on my sim computer.

It took Magoo and I quite a few attempts to get a working .Air and .cfg file pairing for Nigels Avro.

Ttfn

Pete

 

[vinci]

Thanks for this model, for me it works fine with the lindell's .air file .

 

[gaucho_59]

My two bits....

I thought I'd give it a try too. lol
Here is a quick study for the panel.
G.

 

[Cees Donker]

Hi Chris,

Welcome to this forum. Absolutely no need to avoid it and it is nice to have a legend from the old days among us. I can assure you, we all appreciate what you are doing for us, although we sometimes express this is a somewhat strange way.

And concerning the He100D..... The unavoidable has already started!

Cheers,
Huub

that's the spirit Huub!



Cees