C-47 update

[Manschy]

This is a milestone in flightsim development! I am anxious to see the next screens and the models exterior....

[bazzar]

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.

[c87]

Looks awesome, Bazz! A sure buy for me!

[Manschy]

Thanks, Bazz! Marvellous!

[gaab]

@bazzar
<Begin OT>
Any chance to get "fresh" info on Caravelle making ?

Sorry to hijack your topic...
</End OT>

Gérard

[cavaricooper]

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

[bazzar]

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]

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

[bazzar]

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]

"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.

[bazzar]

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.

[Alan_A]

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.

[bazzar]

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.

[Alan_A]

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

[banjoman1960]

this is the C47 i miss all Time in P3Dv4,and i like to pay for this

[Sundog]

As someone who has made flight models and aircraft for FS, and this is something I would like to see if MS is going to tackle with their new sim, I would like a way to change the flight responses based on the end users joy-stick/settings. I know back when we were developing planes, Ed Walters and myself would go back and forth on the FDE's, because how it felt to me and how it felt to him, based on the given response rates (roll rate, etc) were completely different for us because we were using quite different joysticks. I've often thought that there should be some sort of gauge in the VC that would adjust the rates based on the joystick one is using. If I ever start developing again, that's something I plan to look at, as I modify the FDE of almost every aircraft I have, since I use a Warthog HOTAS with a stick extension and rudder pedals. Needless to say, the stick extension has removed many of the pitch PIO's I used to get in some planes.

I only bring this up, because I find the experience from many end users about various aircraft FDE's can differ greatly based on the flight controls they're using versus the flight controls used to develop the FDE. I don't think many end users realize how important that is and why there may be discrepancies between the various responses of users with regard to the FDE. In any actual aircraft built, the flight controls themselves are integral to the flight control and response of the aircraft, so even a pilot who has many hours on a specific aircraft won't get the same responses unless their sim J/S is set up to correctly replicate what was in the actual aircraft.

I should also add that my degree is in Aeronautical Engineering, and while I had some flight controls classes, my major was in aerodynamics and my minor was in propulsion. I just posted this as this as something I wanted people to think about with regard to the development of FDEs. Hopefully some of you will find it useful as a sim PSA. YMMV.

Ken

[Alan_A]

Really good point. I've just gotten back to the Majestic Q400 Pro, which has not only the external flight model but higher-frequency control input. Combine that with the high frame rates, and with high-end hardware, and it's an exceptionally smooth experience - emphasis on "exceptionally," because most setups aren't like that.

What makes what you're proposing (automatic calibration between the controller and the sim) difficult in practice is that the hardware controller is just one variable (admittedly a big one) in the chain - the software would also have to take into account some of the things noted above, like input frequency and frame rate, plus others, basically the type of connection (USB 3.0 or 2.0 or some other interface), basically the whole chain by which the controller's input gets to the sim aircraft controls.

If I recall correctly, A2A created a "by hand" solution for the 172, and maybe some of their other GAs, where you could manually adjust the way the control responsiveness. And of course there's FSUIPC, where, if you've got the paid version, you can create customized response curves by aircraft or by type.

The problem with both of those is that whatever solution a user creates is going to be subjective, so it'd still be hard to say if it's right or not.

To your point about the new sim - if the need to make it X-Box compatible leads to more standarized hardware -then an automated solution could work. You'd be taking a lot of variables out of the chain.

Could be one more reason to look forward to FS 2020.

[bazzar]

Having enough power in your rig is vital for a worthwhile simulation experience, especially now that we have big rate hogs like complex sceneries and so on. No amount of tweaking by an FD author is going to make a scrap of difference if the computer isn't up to the task and the joystick is not calibrated. Smooth flight will come with enough memory and a decent video card. I use a $30 joystick but I make sure it's calibrated properly. What I would like to find is a good quality stick that gives me 2 separate throttle sliders that doesn't need a second mortgage.

Other factors affecting FDs in the sim are realism settings. I believe most developers including us develop for realism sliders set to max. Back that off and the FDs will change.

[Alan_A]

The CH Quad is a pretty good inexpensive option for dual throttles (and some other axes besides) if you don't mind the very short throws.

I seem to remember a discussion a few years ago on the A2A forums - it was pinned for a while, maybe it still is - where they discovered that a large number of their customers were using the FSX/P3D default controller sensitivity settings, which put the sensitivity and null zone axes right in the middle of the scale. Of course, a linear response would require the sensitivity slider full right and the null zone full left. So people were complaining about aircraft responsiveness mainly because they had their controllers mis-set. A developer that gets that kind of complaint would have to ask the users a whole series of questions about the response curve in addition to all the stuff noted above - controller stiffness and throw, connection speed, frame rate, etc. You can't safely assume that any user has things set up the right way.

[flyingboxcar]

this is the C47 i miss all Time in P3Dv4,and i like to pay for this

I fly with the VA DC3 Airways and in earlier FS versions we used this plane in some of our multi flight sessions and had a ball with it. Now most of us are using P3D v4.5 and the plane will not work there. It sure would be nice to have this plane avavilable for use in P3D V4. Just sayin'.
Howard

[flyingboxcar]

The CH Quad is a pretty good inexpensive option for dual throttles (and some other axes besides) if you don't mind the very short throws.

I seem to remember a discussion a few years ago on the A2A forums - it was pinned for a while, maybe it still is - where they discovered that a large number of their customers were using the FSX/P3D default controller sensitivity settings, which put the sensitivity and null zone axes right in the middle of the scale. Of course, a linear response would require the sensitivity slider full right and the null zone full left. So people were complaining about aircraft responsiveness mainly because they had their controllers mis-set. A developer that gets that kind of complaint would have to ask the users a whole series of questions about the response curve in addition to all the stuff noted above - controller stiffness and throw, connection speed, frame rate, etc. You can't safely assume that any user has things set up the right way.

I use the registered version of FSUIPC with P3D V4.5 and am quite happy with it. I have the CH Products yoke, pedals, and throttle quadrant, and a Logitech Freedom 2.4 stick, and setup each plane in FSUIPC using the Specific Aircraft feature and can tell you that every plane is different, but by using this feature you can get pretty much just what you might think the plane should fell like. I can only reference the real planes I have flown, but I have 5 of them in the sim and using FSUIPC, they are all different from each other, as it should be. If you only use the adjustment available in the sim and not FSUIPC, you are missing a lot.
Howard

[YoYo]

From his FB:





Btw.

According roadmap of AH:

"Several projects are nearing completion and release:
Douglas C-47/DC-3 will be out in July"

I suppose we will wait a little longer for this bird.

[cavaricooper]

Brilliant to see her in civvies... THAT’S what’s been missing all along... fantastic! There have been so many of these old girls plodding for so long relentlessly, bringing health and commerce to the far corners of the world. To finally have her out of khaki is really the bees knees.

There are mounds of adventure awaiting... from the bush to Burma, from Rangoon to Paho and all points betwixt.

Ta- C

[YoYo]

cavaricooper

Brilliant to see her in civvies... THAT’S what’s been missing all along... fantastic! There have been so many of these old girls plodding for so long relentlessly, bringing health and commerce to the far corners of the world. To finally have her out of khaki is really the bees knees.

There are mounds of adventure awaiting... from the bush to Burma, from Rangoon to Paho and all points betwixt.

Ta- C

I hope we recive the paintkit also.

[Sundog]

Nice PBR on that metal!