A few observations on the Cardinal 177

[LAdamson 240]

At least this argument is interesting enough, that I want to go streach a tight string across the top of a Cardinal's wing.. If it's just slight, then okay. If it's more then..........I did think those photo's of the 421's nose to be of interest, considering they made it like two completely different aircraft. In the meantime, I need to find a real live Cardinal, and not take any photo as fact.L.Adamson

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Lou made the comment based on the 3-view drawings, that if they were off, it couldn't be by more than .5 a degree, or something like that. Surprisingly, that can cause a huge perception difference at the wing tip. I've seen quite a few Cardinals on the flightline, and almost partnered on one about 20 years ago with a CFI. Gave that one a pretty good going over. But the fact that it had the lower HP engine, plus the CFI backing out of the deal (he became engaged--a worthy reason) kept me from going further with it. Lou may very well be right, but I certainly don't care for the way he presents his thoughts. And the tail is certainly not the tail of a 78 Cardinal, although it closely matches that of a '74. I am settled (and will still keep) on the Dreamfleet Cardinal as is, since 90 pct. of my time is in the FS cockpit. I am just stunned on how my presenting an opinion puts me in a reality warp in Lou's eyes. There was no need for that comment--no need to put his customers down. And of course I'm assuming I'm the one his comment is directed at, since I opened up a thread on the subject.If you get to a Cardinal again before I do, I'd love to see what you find out. The best means of measurement would probably be using a tape measure at both the root and the wingtip, using the top of the wing to measure from. I was never that scientific (and thus will be forever cursed in Lou's eyes :) ). I imagine that I could have picked up on some visual cue which made me believe there was dihedral, but the plane sure handled like there was dihedral! So even the plane believed it!But I consider you one of the best and fairest on the subject of simming.... I'd accept your findings as gospel, no question. I'd still have a Voodoo in my system if I hadn't listened to you!-John

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Since he locked the thread in the support forum (which I won't visit again), here are my thoughts:Your quotes:"You think because you paid for the Cardinal, that gives you the right to speak to me that way? I think not."Speak to you that way? I didn't question your reality, or your perceptions. Yet you've made it a mission in several threads to debunk my thoughts on the subject. I paid for the Cardinal, but I am NOT PAID for the insults which you started to sling first."Of course, since you are an "expert", I guess you should get special treatment, eh?"No... I'm a customer. And darn right I deserve special treatment."Yes, you may be a paying cutomer, but like it or not, while here you WILL follow the rules and you WILL speak in a courteous and respectful manner, as you are in our "home".Having paid for something does not give you the right to speak to us any way you wish."Owning a company does not give you the right to embarrass your customers. You entered my home the minute I bought your product. IMHO, you don't have any right to tell me what to say, or what to think, although I'll certainly bow out of your forum, since it's proven sad for me to open any thread there. Having said that, you certainly don't have the right to carry on the way you do. You could have made the discussion private and voiced your disagreement via email. Sorry bud..you chose the venue, not I.

[Guest gasebah]

Dear Tom,thank you so much for a very clear and embracable statement.Alex

[Guest]

>>You know it's funny, I posted several screenshots the first >day the Dreamfleet Cardinal was released, praising >Dreamfleet for the overall quality of the product. You >pretty much ignored my praise, yet I saw you acknowledge >others. But you have no problem arguing over my >"perceptions".... How grand! >I wouldn't agree to that. I for example have been trying to thank everyone for their great repaints but even my time is limited and sometimes there might be a few posts that I simply don't have time to answer or write my "thank'ya's". I suppose the same goes to everyone. If the case is that I have been ignoring your posts, it's not done on purpose, it really isn't. Every single repaint of our planes is worth of thanking. They are all excellent as at least I haven't seen any "bad" ones. So, I'm very sorry if you feel like beeing ignored. That's not the case. I hope you as well as others to continue showing us your repaints as I really enjoy them!!>I am curious whether Mikko's >coming into Avsim claiming there's be a patch to fix the >dihedral (he didn't mention the oversized rudder) was just >to quell the discussion there. No matter, I won't be looking >for it... Oversized rudder? There is no oversized rudder...

[Guest gasebah]

This whole thread just prooves every prejudice I might have had agianst the DF Forum and Mr. Lou Betty to be 100% too.Really no need to comment this any further.Alex

[LAdamson 240]

>but the plane sure handled like there was dihedral! So even >the plane believed it! >It is the fusealage hanging below the wing that gives it the balancing/stabilizing effect of dihedral. Often called the pendulum effect, but that "exact" science has been debated also.L.Adamson

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Thanks Mikko--you have made an effort to acknowledge my posts, and I appreciate it. And from another post, you've inspired me to start (the slow process of) learning GMAX. Sorry about my use of thw word rudder---it'a actually the vertical stab that seemed a few inches too tall.One thing I haven't thought of in all this is how GMAX translates to the FS screen. I know the math behind 3d-2d display very well, and I know the FS "viewport" can really distort things depending on zoom and window dimensions. That might explain why the Cardinal looks different to me, as I haven't seen it from the creator's perspective.For what it's worth--I judge Dreamfleet by your thoughts, and by your taking the time to come in here and join this very sensitive thread. Now go out and design a great Lancair IV-P for us! I'm sure you'll get it ready in just a couple of weeks.... It's that easy, right? NOT! :)-John

[Guest WorkingStiff]

I'm convinced that you just love to argue and keep things stirred up; even when the facts aren't necessarily in your favor.Nowhere in that thread did Lou Betti mention "Cactus" or "JohnCi." How you made the leap in logic to determine that Lou's mention of complaints about dihedral was in reference to you escapes me. Do you think you might be the only person who complained?

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"How you made the leap in logic to determine that Lou's mention of complaints about dihedral was in reference to you...."You're quite right--I may be one of many who noted the issue, and I only argue when people refuse to "discuss". Due to the fact that I did note the issue, followed by Lou's comments, I am singled out whether his comments were directed at me, or at a group of customers in general. He has issues with OUR opinions.Lou did not make any effort to personally discuss the issues I raised in my comparison thread...pretty much came out with an "I'm right and that's it" style of comment. He could have sent me an email. I would have been happy to talk about it, and perhaps learn something in the process. Instead just do a search on the word "dihedral" in the Dreamfleet support forum, and he takes digs and potshots at the topic in several posts.IMHO (and I'm not saying Lou's hit this extreme, yet), whenever a commercial vendor starts commenting on customer's perceptions or grasp of "reality", whether targeted at a group of customers or an individual customer, such comments skirt very close to offensive and defamatory behavior. To me that's unacceptable for a payware vendor, and judging from the volume of emails I've received since yesterday, I find I'm not the only one who feels this way. Lou took the discussion public.... I only entered this thread when it became a passion of his to debunk the whole issue of dihedral in the Dreamfleet forum, and those who thought to join me in raising it.

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

I guess this discussion is going to force me to go look at some images for dihedral, heh? :)

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Actually, in retrospect Tom, I somewhat wish you would remove all my comments in this thread. Seems my problems with Lou started when I took the issue "outside of the Dreamfleet family" and brought it into this forum. In a sense, I'm guilty of what I accused Lou of. I'll leave the decision to pull my posts in your hands, but I wanted to share my thoughts with you on the subject... -John

[LAdamson 240]

John,That's kind of what I noticed. It happened at the same time as the "other" issue with VC cockpit perspectives which was also brought into this forum. That put Lou on edge, you on edge, as well as the other guy also. I just kind of took the "center seat" on this one, because I could see where everyone was coming from, not to mention the bias that still somewhat exist's between these forums.L.Adamson

[Tom Allensworth 1,532]

Okay, fair enough. I will lock the thread down then.