New AH: Stinson L5 on the desk

[YoYo]

AH never sleeps?
Something from news page: Stinson L5 not a beauty ! :- DDD

[falcon409]

Excellent!

[IFlySWA]

Wonderful! I love the way AH displays their models in that cgi hangar.

Brian

[sidler]

I need that!!!

Dick

[Roger]

Good to see and a good enough replacement for the Sibwings Bird dog if it isn't updated to P3Dv4.

[Crusader]

Good replacement for the Bird Dog . Like many here , truely miss Sibwings .Will certainly be looking for this one .

[Yossarian1943]

Good replacement for the Bird Dog . Like many here , truely miss Sibwings .Will certainly be looking for this one .

Yoo are right. Surely will get this bird . But please AH do a Birddog too. Maybe TackPacked.

[Bomber_12th]

Edit: Not worth it trying to help/provide support.

[Crusader]

As usual , outstanding pictures John and very informative . thanks for posting these .

Rich

[Bradburger]

BTW, if anyone from Aeroplane Heaven might view this, I have access to all of the original Stinson L-5 engineering drawings/blueprints, as well as access to various L-5, OY-1 and OY-2 training manuals, flight operating manuals, erection & maintenance manuals, illustrated parts breakdown manual, technical orders and more, if any help is desired/details need clarifying. There is no reason why any detail of the plane cannot be made 100% right.

But John,

I thought they used "original factory plans and drawings" already?

(Written with tongue slightly in cheek!)

Anyway, looking good so far, but I DO hope AH take your kind offer of all the material you have on this aeroplane, and use it to make it as accurate as possible.

Cheers

Paul

[pilto von pilto]

One of the reasons we no longer frequent forums is that we are so tired of people telling us how we should do our job or what we should or should not do. We have been,successfully, building and selling add-ons for flight simulators for 17 years and had a bucketload of fun. In that time we have produced over 50 titles many of which have won awards for the work. We will continue to build the way we always have to a level we are satisfied with, given price (by all means compare our prices) and timing (by all means compare that too). We will always strive to make things as accurate as possible but basically the message is a simple one and delivered countless times - if you don't like what you see, please don't buy our products.

[Switchblade408]

There's a Stinson L-5 at the Vintage Flying Museum where I volunteer. It hangs from the ceiling, so it doesn't actually fly, but it would be nice to add this aircraft to my virtual VFM fleet.

[Bradburger]

With the greatest respect pvp, I nor anyone else in this thread were telling you how to do your jobs!

(Whilst I'm sure you do get the odd one or two that do, I've never seen that here).

John offered you all he has on the Stinson L-5 in terms of original engineering blueprints and drawings, plus numerous other documentation, so you at least have the opportunity to check and, if needed, enhance the accuracy of your up and coming L-5. As a respected developer, experienced 3D modeller, and texture artist in his own right, he could well have played the 'I can do better than you' card", but chose not to.

Whilst the WIP pics of your L-5 look excellent, I do not know what drawings and reference material you are using and it's accuracy, but even so, it seems a very generous offer to me.

I was a little disheartened to read your response on your Facebook page when someone pointed out that the canopy of your up and coming (and much anticipated) P-47D was incorrect. This was a valid and legitimate observation, backed up by someone else in your FB comments, and indeed in the thread on the P-47D here at SoH.

(John pointed out the problem as well, and provided an original Republic drawing of the canopy, along with a wealth of other Republic documents and photos for reference, which you may, or may not have in your possession).

Your (AH) response to the FB post was as if the poster was some sort of troll, trying his best to cause trouble and stir the pot, which was clearly not the case!

But what I found most alarming was the fact that you (as in AH) ended your reply to their comment with "I'd wait for the release rather than rely on pics. Oh wait, you're not going to are you", which seemed rather judgemental and assuming, given it was a piece of constructive criticism.

(Maybe they won't buy it now after all).

I'm not trying to turn this thread (or any other) into a catfight or a bash against AH, but I think when an observation or criticism is valid and proven to be so, there is no need for a respected developer to throw their toys out of the pram so to speak.

(Take it on the chin, no matter how many awards or accolades they might have won).

We currently have a very healthy hobby that at one stage looked as if it might die.

Now is the time for both the developers and customers to work together, and push for getting products to be of the highest standards, and that includes accuracy and authenticity of the visuals, because that is what this hobby now demands, especially when one claims their products to be so.

Enjoy your simming!

Cheers

Paul

[pilto von pilto]

With the greatest respect pvp, I nor anyone else in this thread were telling you how to do your jobs!

(Whilst I'm sure you do get the odd one or two that do, I've never seen that here).

John offered you all he has on the Stinson L-5 in terms of original engineering blueprints and drawings, plus numerous other documentation, so you at least have the opportunity to check and, if needed, enhance the accuracy of your up and coming L-5. As a respected developer, experienced 3D modeller, and texture artist in his own right, he could well have played the 'I can do better than you' card", but chose not to.

Whilst the WIP pics of your L-5 look excellent, I do not know what drawings and reference material you are using and it's accuracy, but even so, it seems a very generous offer to me.

I was a little disheartened to read your response on your Facebook page when someone pointed out that the canopy of your up and coming (and much anticipated) P-47D was incorrect. This was a valid and legitimate observation, backed up by someone else in your FB comments, and indeed in the thread on the P-47D here at SoH.

(John pointed out the problem as well, and provided an original Republic drawing of the canopy, along with a wealth of other Republic documents and photos for reference, which you may, or may not have in your possession).

Your (AH) response to the FB post was as if the poster was some sort of troll, trying his best to cause trouble and stir the pot, which was clearly not the case!

But what I found most alarming was the fact that you (as in AH) ended your reply to their comment with "I'd wait for the release rather than rely on pics. Oh wait, you're not going to are you", which seemed rather judgemental and assuming, given it was a piece of constructive criticism.

(Maybe they won't buy it now after all).

I'm not trying to turn this thread (or any other) into a catfight or a bash against AH, but I think when an observation or criticism is valid and proven to be so, there is no need for a respected developer to throw their toys out of the pram so to speak.

(Take it on the chin, no matter how many awards or accolades they might have won).

We currently have a very healthy hobby that at one stage looked as if it might die.

Now is the time for both the developers and customers to work together, and push for getting products to be of the highest standards, and that includes accuracy and authenticity of the visuals, because that is what this hobby now demands, especially when one claims their products to be so.

Enjoy your simming!

Cheers

Paul

You are missing the point entirely. The "judgemental" element is coming from you, not us. You assume that a) we have got things wrong and b) we are not going to correct any errors if there are any. So just because you don't know what references we use you assume ours are wrong or not the same as say John's? All we ask is for a little respect in that after 17 years we might know what we are doing.

[AussieMan]

Come on fellas this is drifting too far off topic and is starting to turn into a slanging match and we don't want that. Please ALL pull back, take a deep breath and count to 10 then think hard about what you post. We don't want to have to close this thread but if push comes to shove then it will be closed.

[moune]

Hello,
Sure, it's a beautifull plane, the bull dog also but...

In 2006 i"ve by the Digital Aviation DO-27, in 2009, the update (réduce price) coming for FsX.
Now, in 2017, i've the pleasure to flight with it in FsX, i wait the new update if it's possible.
I've all textures for it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8uX2EP91Yg

blue sky, moune.

[menef]

GREAT AH!!!! When your first military jet?

[Roger]

GREAT AH!!!! When your first military jet?

So you don't know about their Gloster Meteor?

[thefrog]

So you don't know about their Gloster Meteor?

Or the Hunter!

[cavaricooper]

Really looking forward to this and the C-46....

Best- C

[dvj]

You are missing the point entirely. The "judgemental" element is coming from you, not us. You assume that a) we have got things wrong and b) we are not going to correct any errors if there are any. So just because you don't know what references we use you assume ours are wrong or not the same as say John's? All we ask is for a little respect in that after 17 years we might know what we are doing.

What I don't understand is why developer's continue to post early, incorrect renderings and then not expect people to comment or pass judgement on the inaccuracies presented. It's just a natural response, especially in a forum like this one where there are people with lifetime's of aviation expertise.

[pilto von pilto]

What I don't understand is why developer's continue to post early, incorrect renderings and then not expect people to comment or pass judgement on the inaccuracies presented. It's just a natural response, especially in a forum like this one where there are people with lifetime's of aviation expertise.

Let me help you understand DVJ.

It's a free internet ( for now ) people can criticise based on wip/in progress shots all they like, no problems. But be prepared for the "natural response " from the developer. Especially with the very real situation of people with agendas posting publicly innocuous and seemingly innocent criticisms which are actually far more than they seem.

So what is a developer to do? Does a dev now not talk about anything at all until it is absolutely ready? Do we muzzle developers? Or do we embrace the fact that if you are going to " pass judgement on the inaccuracies presented. " without taking into account it is a work in progress early dev pic then you to will receive a "natural response ".

[huub vink]

Let me try to help you understand Piloto von Piloto

What I see is somebody offering help. When you don't want or need it it fine. But the way you react is with "One of the reasons we no longer frequent forums is that we are so tired of people telling us how we should do our job or what we should or should not do", is in my opinion quite blunt (and that is mildly said).

I understand you don't want help here, are not interested in the opinion of members here and just get tired from them. Therefore I seriously wonder what you are doing here.

When you are here just to annoy the members here, I rather have you will stick to your plan not to frequent forums anymore.

I decided to this thread as I don't think this leads anywhere.

Huub