• 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.

    Post 16 Update

    Post 17 Warning

SU-26 is out!!

gtirob01 said:
Misleading? How so? I have never actually flown a real SU-26, so I wouldnt know the difference either way. I just want to have some fun with a great looking aircraft. Im sure a majority of buyers feel the same. If you want a real, 100% authentic, no holds barred flight model.... go to Russia, and get yourself into the real deal and tell us all how it compared.
Click to expand...

Yeah, i'll get right on that Russia trip... I'm not critising them for not being able to make it accurate, just for advertising that it is accurate. If you bought a toaster that looked nice, but didn't actually toast anything, I imagine you would find the fact that they called it a toaster a bit misleading, right? Would you write a review about how nice the toaster looked or ask for a refund? I'm failing to understand how people are confused by this simple concept and how it is misleading.
 
It would be misleading to me if I were a real world SU-26 pilot, and I found that this model for FSX is not the same, or even close. Then, and only then may you have a point. But really, how many people on here have actually flown a real SU-26? How many people can truly say if it is accurate or not? At the end of the day, this is a sim, and a sim to have a little fun.

Your toaster argument is like apples to oranges. Everybody has a toaster and knows what they should do, and how they should do it. If I got a bad toaster, I bring it back to the store I bought it from and get a replacement.
 
gtirob01 said:
It would be misleading to me if I were a real world SU-26 pilot, and I found that this model for FSX is not the same, or even close. Then, and only then may you have a point. But really, how many people on here have actually flown a real SU-26? How many people can truly say if it is accurate or not? At the end of the day, this is a sim, and a sim to have a little fun. QUOTE]

Actually a SIMULATOR is to SIMULATE and have a little fun. I am a real world pilot and have seen the SU-26 (based at my home airport) perform at airshows in southern Alberta, Canada. Real world can knife edge for a short period of time and maintain altitude, sim su-26 drops out of the sky and I know for a fact that this is not a sim limitation as ive done it with many other sim aircraft. Again, the issue i'm at is over the marketing of the aircraft, that is all. No reason this has to turn into a 'how dare you insult a dev!' thread... Carenado (who I believe is either the same company or related) has produced many outstanding aircraft (I own around 10 of them I think) and I have always been overwhelmingly pleased.
Click to expand...
 
Snowbird is it really that bad? This is yet another thread dumping on someone's hard work and let's face it just to get the model to look that good must have taken considerable effort! Did you contact the developer first to see if any issues had been reported or to make a report yourself?

Frankly with these stickies of new releases being blasted from a great height it seems it would be better to simply have an announcements page!

If our FsX developers are so poor, deserving so many damning posts of late, then perhaps MS Flight would suit better because the guys who make the sim and all the add-ons are all under the same roof so complaining is easier.
 
Come on, people....a few observations. Some of these points essentially repeat:

1. Developers can and do make mistakes and/or release things when they feel they are "close enough". This can be proven through such things as the issuance of patches, whether initiated through the developer, or though a wide amount of constructive criticism.

2. I'm sure we all appreciate new aircraft releases, whether or not they're payware or freeware. On that note, I don't care if something is freeware, payware, or if the dev has an "outstanding" reputation either way. If something is wrong, they should be told about it, and the developer (and their supporters) should not act indignant when the facts are presented. This also relates to this strange mindset on various forums that "freeware (and some payware) developers can do no wrong or do not make mistakes!". (I have actually heard the argument used in one case that developer XYZ does not make mistakes in their addons..when a realism issue popped up.)

3. Let those who know, help those who don't. Sometimes, those who know didn't make the aircraft, or have the opportunity to test for those who don't. As people have said, we are here to help each other, and developers of aircraft should be open to that help if a flaw is pointed out!

The following is really what I have issue with lately:

4. Related to the quality of work of any/all addons: We absolutely must not rest on our laurels! I've seen posters here and elsewhere say, when confronted with criticism, that the end-user should simply be happy that the product was made, and that because someone put effort into it, that's all that counts. If we didn't continue to push ourselves for ever higher standards of excellence, we would still be using a sim and addons with the capabilities of a decade ago, if not more so. Yes, there is a line of critique that may not be appropriate for the time...this includes rivet counting in the *literal* sense.

However, if some are pushing for accurate systems, sounds, or a flight model, which should be well within the capabilities of a developer willing to put in effort (unless the info is classified or something) why is that an argument to be rejected? Every addon maker out there...freeware/payware...whatever is capable of producing products to the highest standards of today's "known companies with high standards", such as one that recently created a 737.

5. Criticism must be tactful. Unfortunately, some seem to think that any criticism is uncalled for.
What I look for if I voice a complaint is the following: 1. What the problem is. 2. What the real world aircraft/scenery location/whatever is like in reality, with examples to support that. 3. Advice on how to accomplish this goal, or compromise to get closer to that goal of realism or a fix in general.

6. Developers should do their best to push themselves to make the most realistic adaptations of aircraft/scenery possible! If something comes up leading to the lack of implementation of a feature, especially if it is wanted or expected, then maybe a note saying "this is what we aimed for and accomplished, this is what could not be accomplished for x, y, z reasons. Maybe someone can help?"



Regarding this Sukhoi specifically, I have yet to purchase due to the facts presented. These are:
1. It apparently does not sound accurate at all. (Allegedly not even a radial engine sound)
2. The flight model is not nearly close enough. Now, we know that the FS engine can't do much with aerobatic physics anyway, but this issue sounds like it goes beyond that.
3. It *does* look good. Exterior modelling seems to be fine.
4. Summary...nice picture with no substance.

Issue 1 can be fixed with proper research and implementation.
Issue 2 can be addressed to a closer extent. We all know it can't be perfect due to the aerobatic nature, but it sounds like it can closer.
Non-issue 3...haven't heard a bad thing about the looks!



All in all....

Criticism of any product, freeware or payware, should be allowed. The key here is presenting it with evidence, and not simply saying, "X aspect of this addon sucks!". Instead "X aspect is inaccurate and could be better...here's why".

No developer is so good that they are beyond needing help, making mistakes, etc.

No end-user is entitled to get everything that they ask for in an addon, BUT, the developer should be willing to push themselves to the best of their abilities, rather than relying on the "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" development mentality. If it can't be done/implemented, it can't...but bringing up a neat aspect that *may* be able to be isn't a bad thing.

Yes, expectations are high, but developers should be willing to work with that and raise the bar. "OK, we can't put in dynamically moving fuzzy-dice, but we'll put in X for you instead, how about that?"

I don't think anyone here is expecting an aircraft to be the end-all, be-all of simulator addons. We're looking for realism that's practical and able to be implemented, not the ability to run our virtual fingers across individual modeled fibers in a cloth seat or something.


Developers: It's not what you can do, it's what you could do. Push yourselves to try new things. Lead the pack with the quality of your addons. Put realism at the forefront!
End-Users: Be tactful when addressing issues. Push, but don't bully developers into excelling further and outputting their very best!
 
I really, seriously cannot believe that we are seeing yet another 'It doesn't fly like the real thing and can't do everything the real plane can' threads come out of this!!!

...Listen, people...this is an aerobatic plane designed for FLIGHT SIMULATION. FLIGHT SIMULATION!!!!!

There never has been, nor will there ever be, any addon aircraft that can come even close to what a real aerobat can do in the real world, on a PC!!!! Get used to it! They make addons that can come sorta-kinda-maybe-possibly close, as far as relatively TAME aerobatics are concerned...but that is it!!!! By Alabeo saying 'Real' anything, is simply them saying 'hey, we tried to get some of the performance characteristics as close as we could'. This is an extremely annoying thing to see in each and every topic that is started on every single freaking new plane!!! I have been flying for years and still have yet to see anything that comes even relatively close to the real thing!!!! It is a PC simulation! It has limitations! Get over it!!!!!
 
So let me get this straight...because the aircraft cannot accurately perform a couple of maneuvers, it is being labeled as "unflyable"? Because it cannot perform some advanced maneuvers, does that mean it cannot take-off, it cannot be handled in-flight, it cannot be rolled, it cannot be looped, and one can not land it - all virtually mind you - because as far as I'm concerned, if it can do all that, it sounds like it is at least the majority of the way there. Please don't just slam an entire piece of work, especially from a new developer, which seems to make an extremely nice looking product besides, simply because of a few items which might not be absolutely perfect - let alone, dismiss it for not being able to do what hardly any other alternative could. If you really desire better, contact the developer first hand, and don't go in with fists flying - make it a motive to help, rather than advise or call attention to just issues alone - it might be surprising just what it gets you, who knows! I think I can safely say, that the route taken through the ways displayed here, won't get anyone anywhere.

Again, if you really do care to see the product improved, rather than just throwing blatant criticisms around leading to nothing in return but "heating up the forums", talk with the developer and see where it takes you.
 
Felixthreeone said:
There never has been, nor will there ever be....
Click to expand...

It's always amusing to come back to points like this after a few years of further development.

Also, the post as a whole is a simplification of the argument, from my understanding. I think everyone here realizes that Microsoft Flight Simulator X has current engine limitations that prohibit the possibility of completely realistic flight dynamics, and I don't think people are looking for by-the-numbers, mathematically precise, all-encompassing aerobatic fidelity with this addon. However, they are looking for a closer approximation over what's been provided. It's possible to refine a product while maintaining the realization that current technology will prevent you from getting it 100% perfect.

Note: I made a long post about this on the previous page for those that may have missed it...

And yet again, this will thread will likely be shut down because some rest on their laurels, some want to act holier than thou, some want to white knight, and some can't express their critique of an addon constructively.

Another note: I've only seen one person here label it as unflyable. Other points about the FDE have been cited from real world examples, and the capabilities of other aerobatic addons.

As others have mentioned, it's a computer game hobby. It's a game that can be used to train for real world flying events, and a game where you can cruise around at mach 3 in the grand canyon, or anything in between.

Why there are egos involved here is something that's puzzling to me. All I hope for is that continued progress is made, new boundaries are pushed, and new previously "impossible" features are "unlocked", in order to further our enjoyment of this hobby. We've seen some remarkable advancements in FSX capabilities over the previous few years from a number of developers, and I hope this "fear of criticism" trend doesn't slow that process down and entice a mindset of "well, there's no new tech in this plane, but we're XYZ company, and they'll buy from us no matter what."
As I said on the previous page, while we have to have reasonable expectations, we still should be able to push for advancement, and not settle for "same-old, same-old".
 
Sean, what John and Felix have posted is correct. As John wrote:

"...if you really do care to see the product improved, rather than just throwing blatant criticisms around leading to nothing in return but "heating up the forums", talk with the developer and see where it takes you."

We have an unprecedented over-heating of our FsX forum at the moment and as moderators and administrators of this site we have to take the heat out...for the sake of SOH: it's that simple. If we slackened our moderation, anarchy would prevail and we won't allow that. We have a long and proud history here, advert free and covering as many sim related topics as possible; we have something of great value to the community in these forums and we will protect it at all costs.
 
Roger said:
Sean, what John and Felix have posted is correct. As John wrote:

"...if you really do care to see the product improved, rather than just throwing blatant criticisms around leading to nothing in return but "heating up the forums", talk with the developer and see where it takes you."

We have an unprecedented over-heating of our FsX forum at the moment and as moderators and administrators of this site we have to take the heat out...for the sake of SOH: it's that simple.
Click to expand...

And I agree fully that issues, wishes, and other notations need to be addressed to the developer. I also agree that SOH (at least the FSX part) seems quite argumentative lately. From my lurking observations, the mods here have done a pretty good job of eliminating the obviously non-constructive points made by the more aggressive members here, but on that note, I would hope that, as adults (and I think I'm one of the younger ones here) that we can talk about the pros and cons of various subjects without resulting to grade-school drama and a re-adoption of our teenage years.

In my opinion, the need to heavily moderate (some may call it censoring) a forum reflects extremely poorly on the mindset and maturity of the community. Obviously, there's not much anyone can do, and the moderating is indeed needed, but it certainly leads to unfortunate circumstances, such as developers removing themselves from public discourse, as has happened recently.

The members here have a right to know what's good and bad about any product. I know that's it's especially dangerous to point out a bug or issue as it relates to any freeware production, whether or not that bug is related to a realism factor, or a "technology-is-fighting back" factor. On that same note, especially since money is involved, it should be appropriate to bring up constructive criticism and complete, honest observations (and even opinion!) about payware addons!

The crux of the matter is maturity levels. I've seen 80-year-olds act with the abrasiveness of the "stereotypical" teenager, and teens here and elsewhere conduct themselves with dignity and class. A forum that cannot hold civil discussions on topics as docile as an airplane addon for a computer game is one that, I'm sorry to say, needs to reevaluate certain aspects of it's membership. We're all guilty of coming off in manners sometimes that we wish we could take back, that's the internet and our asset of anonymity...but when it becomes a routine issue, is when there are further issues with a membership's mindset.


I plan on purchasing the Su-26 in the coming days to evaluate it myself. If this thread, or a related one (as has happened with a division in the DC-6 threads) opens up, I will be giving an honest opinion of the product. Good points, bad points, and constructive criticism to go with that.

Threads like this help me make decisions on what products to pursue, since screenshots and formal marketing from the developer can only tell one side of the story.

It would be unfortunate to only see an "announcements" section, with a lack of critical analysis due to members here being unable to conduct themselves with decorum, and disagree amicably, and possibly constructively.
 
Sean, as you posted:

"It would be unfortunate to only see an "announcements" section, with a lack of critical analysis due to members here being unable to conduct themselves with decorum, and disagree amicably, and possibly constructively."

This is exactly what is not happening. I agree it's what should happen and to a certain extent it's what used to happen until fairly recently, but it has been wrecked by a few individuals who seem intent on destruction.
 
Can I recommend that if anyone ever has a problem with a product they contact the seller to see if they are aware of it? It just seems these days you can not make everyone happy and frankly.....its the same in the real world. I tell customers everyday "NO!" because guess what....its how things are done...get over it. If they don't like it they will go else where.


So....I say...if you have an issue...take it up with the company...if they don't make you happy. move on. Stop trying to rain on the parade of others who are enjoying the product. The worst thing is...there are people here who havent' even bought it and they are trashing it. WHAT!?!?!?!?


Come...mod's I actually support an announcement sticky and then locking it. Let them take their complaints elsewhere this is getting very old very fast........not only that...I'm tired of threads complaining about complainers......uuughhhh


Can't we just have some fun once in a while in our life? Why does eveything have to be so absolute. If you want aboslute....try out a divorce case like I have to deal with now......trust me...you would rather fly the SU-26.
 
The aircraft looks awesome!

Can somebody post up a quick Youtube vid of the VC and maybe a pan around of the outside of the aircraft?

Thanks!
 
Ok....so...because I want to keep this a postive thread as it should be.......I have found what I believe to be a very good sound replacement.......I am now using the sounds from the Alphasim YAK-52........it is VERY close to the SU-26 sound. Its much better than the supplied sound. I am hoping that one of the payware companies will do one with the FSX sound cone configuration.


I also found that changing this has helped and eliminated some of the side slip....I felt that the plane was a bit underpowered and adjusted the prop thrust some.......I have no idea what I'm doing here guys so.......but I like how it flys and sounds now.

[propeller]
thrust_scalar = 1.5 //Propeller thrust scalar
//thrust_scalar = 1.0 //Propeller thrust scalar
 
Arrested Development?

I wasn't aware (I don't do aerobatics) that there wasn't any 'good' videos of the Yaks or Sukois IN SIMULATOR at YouTube. And someone said 'that's it-no aerobatics in FSX'. Well, I decided I would try making my own FDEs as I did not find any that 'worked'. Imagine that. We have had the Extra 300 around a long time. Nobody worked on it? I know I didn't. I got ahold of a Sukhoi 26, by Ricardo Batalha (Ferrari repaing by Stephen Browning) and tweaked it. Mind you I am NOT any kind of aerobatics expert. I'm new at this. I spent most of my time landing F-18's on carrier, and bush flying, and tweaking vehicles, and flying 'extreme' ac like the Concorde, etc. But not yaks. I made a short video (posting to YouTube now). I'll be baaaack (with link). We (yes, 'we') need to do something about this 'no aerobatics in FSX'. I am willing to share (payware guys too-why not) what I have. Need to 'polish' the FDEs a bit more. It has 'issues' (for one it can't slow down enough to land-flys even on idle! Yikes).
Chuck B
Napamule
Edit: Here is the link to YouTube video: http://youtu.be/9bodec2Ycn0
 
Interesting read. I do like aerobatics. I did them in USAF flight training and later in a rented Citabria. While the Citabria isn't what you would consider a competition aircraft, it could snap roll and scare the poo out of me :) Because of this, I have had a soft spot in my heart for aerobatic aircraft. I have bought most of them. So far my favorite is a freebie.

One of the better flight model developers here in SOH tuned the Extra 300 FDE to make it an Edge 540. Now that baby flies! You can do an edge fly by for close to a mile (1600 meters). The only thing I don't like is to get the rudder to work properly in the air, you can hardly taxi. S-turning this baby while taxing just happens. :icon_lol:

Anyway, I tried to buy the SU-26. After entering all the information and registering, I got a 'Welcome' screen. When I tried again to buy it, I got a message saying that I wasn't in their database???? I used the "Contact Us" screen and sent a message. That was three days ago. I still haven't heard back.

As a consumer, the one big mortal sin you can do as a developer, is not get back with me. I just spent over $2000 on a used telephoto lens to use in wildlife photography. I have some focusing issues and have adjusted my camera's focus fine tune to the limits. I contacted the dealer and they asked me to contact the the lens manufacturer. I did. Five days later, I haven't heard back from the manufacturer. The lens is going back tomorrow. While I own two other lenses from this company and love them, I don't think I will be buying a third. I will spend the extra money and buy from Nikon. They respond!

Developer's, you guys make this hobby possible for us. Without you we would be flying the vanilla aircraft that came with FSX. Please, respond when someone complains. No matter how silly or stupid the complaint may seem. It is for your benefit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top