Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 74

Thread: SU-26 is out!!

  1. #26
    Finally, I decided to buy this bird. What a mistake!!!

    3D model: 5*
    Sound: -1000
    FDE: -1000

    Need a serious update!!! This aircraft almost unflyable, it's just an eye-candy now. (((((((((((((((

  2. #27
    I dont have this aircraft, but, you should be able to that with ease. Its not pushing the boundary at all in that manuver.
    Its only when you push the boundary that FSX screams. What i mean is, It's only when you perform maneuvers that go outside the general function of an aircraft, such as with the F-4 Phantoms and Su-37s backflips, The SU-26s tumble, The F-22s tailslide. Those aint normal, and FSX screams real loud when you try to do them. Of course i've managed to find a way to do it, but thats me ( i'm nuttier than a fruitcake at times ) and it isnt something i would enjoy doing more than once in a flight model. In FSX, you can do anything in the latitudinal plane. But if ypou notice, all those maneuvers listed above are in the longitudinal plane. Longitudinal is almost impossible to deal with. If the tumble is the only thing you cant do in this plane, youve got a great plane for fsx....

  3. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by zlin View Post
    Finally, I decided to buy this bird. What a mistake!!!

    3D model: 5*
    Sound: -1000
    FDE: -1000

    Need a serious update!!! This aircraft almost unflyable, it's just an eye-candy now. (((((((((((((((
    I'm sorry to hear that Zlin. I personally had some hopes for this bird..

  4. #29
    Has any sim modeled aerobatics well since Flight Unlimited back in the 90s?

  5. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by DennyA View Post
    Has any sim modeled aerobatics well since Flight Unlimited back in the 90s?

    NONE! This is what amazes me about this every time a plane comes out that in the RW is an aerobatic champion. I get beat up for it every time...but I'm sorry...its not going to happen in FSX or any sim that is out now...and frankly I doubt that any windows generated program will be able to handle the true flight dynamics of an aerbatic type.

    While I agreee that this plane need some work....I'm having alot of fun with it......I have no doubts that there will be fixes put out from one person or another for it.

  6. #31
    Zlin...you are not going to get what you are looking for. So, until a sim module is built to add something to FSX please don't trash people's hard work. Just asking nicely, ok.

    Maybe you could fine tune an FDE and show us all how it is supposed to fly. Could you try that approach instead?

    Jim

  7. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by JAllen View Post
    Zlin...you are not going to get what you are looking for. So, until a sim module is built to add something to FSX please don't trash people's hard work. Just asking nicely, ok.

    Maybe you could fine tune an FDE and show us all how it is supposed to fly. Could you try that approach instead?

    Jim

    +1...total agreement. If I had any idea of how to do it...I'd be on it now.

  8. #33
    Im not buying this because of its aerobatic "realism". I'm buying it because it is an awesome looking aircraft! The pics of it are stunning and I know I can have fun in this thing.

    One question.... Does the download require any type of online activation? Or do you just download and fly it once purchased? Reason I ask is because I do not currently have internet at home.

  9. #34
    I entered the key provided and do not know or had any indication of an online process after that. Perhaps best asked of Alabeo.

    Looks really sweet. Surprised at how short the takeoff was. In the air it has very sensitive control response to the way my stick is calibrated. View from the cockpit is unusual in that you sit very low. Kept trying to "sit up" more but found the canopy right there. Looks right by a video I saw.

    Enjoyed stalling it out and hearing the stall warning go off. Instantly twists and turns on a dime. More so than the Pitts it seemed. Had the feeling it would do anything. In fact, I just jerked the stick and rudder around violently to see what happened...I just got dizzy. The aircraft was still with me.

    Tomorrow I'll see if I can land it. :mixedsmi:

    Jim

  10. #35
    Landings are fun also....I side slip all the way in until just before touch down.....very interesting.

  11. #36
    Have to back up Zlin on this one... I agree that people should not trash a developers product; however, if that developer makes false advertisements then they should be accountable. The following is from Alabeo's site...

    Features:
    Blank textures for creating your own designs.
    Custom smoke effect
    REAL Flight Model

    High quality 3D model, textures and sounds.
    Detailed aerobatics maneuvers PDF.
    Get Free Liveries after you buy it!

    Making a statement like this is quite misleading and creates the expectations of the consumer.



  12. #37
    Charter Member 2012
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Lost in the clouds of my mind!
    Age
    34
    Posts
    1,212
    Quote Originally Posted by snowbird552 View Post
    Have to back up Zlin on this one... I agree that people should not trash a developers product; however, if that developer makes false advertisements then they should be accountable. The following is from Alabeo's site...

    Features:
    Blank textures for creating your own designs.
    Custom smoke effect
    REAL Flight Model

    High quality 3D model, textures and sounds.
    Detailed aerobatics maneuvers PDF.
    Get Free Liveries after you buy it!

    Making a statement like this is quite misleading and creates the expectations of the consumer.


    Wow - in that case you can probably find a way of accusing every dev of unwittingly making misleading promises !!

  13. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by snowbird552 View Post
    Have to back up Zlin on this one... I agree that people should not trash a developers product; however, if that developer makes false advertisements then they should be accountable. The following is from Alabeo's site...

    Features:
    Blank textures for creating your own designs.
    Custom smoke effect
    REAL Flight Model

    High quality 3D model, textures and sounds.
    Detailed aerobatics maneuvers PDF.
    Get Free Liveries after you buy it!

    Making a statement like this is quite misleading and creates the expectations of the consumer.


    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.

  14. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Barnes View Post
    Wow - in that case you can probably find a way of accusing every dev of unwittingly making misleading promises !!
    Unwittingly? Seems pretty direct and straight forward to me, not sure how someone would post that without being aware of how it would be interpreted lol. Maybe I should release an F-18 sound pack with "Real F-18 sounds" but use recordings from a 737, it's a jet and should be good enough, right? Think anyone would be angry if it was payware? I rarely make negative comments, infact I think this is probably only the 2nd time I have done so (1st being the Alphasim C-17 VC fiasco). If Alabeo wasn't able to reproduce a real flight model due to FSX limitations that is completely understandable. All they had to do was leave that line out or modify it to be accurate.

  15. #40
    Members +
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    California Central Coast
    Age
    74
    Posts
    503

    Dejavu All Over Again

    Quote: '...unwittingly making misleading promises..'

    I don't know about 'unwittingly' but the modeler is in it to make money, not please a fan base. And there is no MORAL dilema involved. He doesn't even KNOW how to fly it? He could care less if it CAN fly. He wants your money, and will haggle with you later about refund, if necessary. There is nobody that will RATE it prior to release. No fact sheet. No spec sheet. You are buying a picture/model that you can fly in FSX. That's IT. Nothing says it will perform like the real AC (or any AC, fictional or imagined). You get: Good, Bad, or Ugly. Case closed.
    Chuck B
    Napamule
    [SIGPIC]i7 2600K @ 3.4 Ghz, Asus P8H67 Pro, Super Talent 8 Gb DDR3/1333 Dual Channel, Sapphire Ati Radeon HD-5700 1 Gb DDR5, Corsair 650 W PSU, Acer 23 in LCD, Windows XP SP2, MS Sidewinder Precision 2 Joy, Logitech K-360 wireless KB & Mouse[/SIGPIC]

  16. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by gtirob01 View Post
    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.
    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.

  17. #42
    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.

  18. #43
    [QUOTE=gtirob01;686095]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.

  19. #44
    Senior Administrator Roger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    EGCD...'til they bulldoze it!
    Age
    62
    Posts
    7,765
    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.
    To err is human; to forgive is divine.

    SYSTEM :
    OS:Win7 Home Premium 64 bit UAC OFF!
    DX versionDx9c and Dx10.
    Processor:I5 4670k overclocked to 4.4 gHz with Corsair CW-9060008-WW hydro cooler
    Motherboard:Z87
    RAM:16 gig 1866 gigaHz Corsair ram
    Video Card:EVGA 770 2 gig ram factory overclocked
    HD:750gb Samsung 840 evo SSD

  20. #45
    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!

    Russian aircraft enthusiast. Can be found in either a Tu-154B-2, Tu-144D, MiG-21MF, or Mi-24D these days, until something new comes along.

  21. #46
    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!!!!!
    Matt

  22. #47
    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.

  23. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Felixthreeone View Post
    There never has been, nor will there ever be....
    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".

    Russian aircraft enthusiast. Can be found in either a Tu-154B-2, Tu-144D, MiG-21MF, or Mi-24D these days, until something new comes along.

  24. #49
    Senior Administrator Roger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    EGCD...'til they bulldoze it!
    Age
    62
    Posts
    7,765
    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.
    To err is human; to forgive is divine.

    SYSTEM :
    OS:Win7 Home Premium 64 bit UAC OFF!
    DX versionDx9c and Dx10.
    Processor:I5 4670k overclocked to 4.4 gHz with Corsair CW-9060008-WW hydro cooler
    Motherboard:Z87
    RAM:16 gig 1866 gigaHz Corsair ram
    Video Card:EVGA 770 2 gig ram factory overclocked
    HD:750gb Samsung 840 evo SSD

  25. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger View Post
    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.
    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.

    Russian aircraft enthusiast. Can be found in either a Tu-154B-2, Tu-144D, MiG-21MF, or Mi-24D these days, until something new comes along.

Members who have read this thread: 2

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •