Sign in to follow this  
Tom Allensworth

A Question about thr RCS B-25

Recommended Posts

Hi,Does anyone know if the RCS B-25 is going to be uploaded to avsim or another site that supports download resuming.Even though I am on ISDN I have had to restart the download twice this morning at about 90%, very frustrating.ThanksDan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Yes, they say it will be uploaded to all the major flightsim sites, and it deserves to be downloaded by every serious simmer. I like it more every time I fly it, and in many respects it's even better than the MAAM sim one. No VC though, but the team offers a good explanation for this omission.- Oyvind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that explanation is that VC's are "gimmicks" and serious flight simmers and real pilots wouldn't ever use something as tacky or gimmicky as a VC without working switches. Well, I guess I don't pass the test and am not "serious" enough for this aircraft. I wonder if the jerk ever heard of pop-up windows...I'll be sticking to the MAAM aircraft and enjoy the fact that I supported a good cause - and the wonderful VC it offers. Colin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Yes, that explanation is that VC's are "gimmicks" and serious flight simmers and real pilots wouldn't ever use something as tacky or gimmicky as a VC without working switches. Well, I guess I don't pass the test and am not "serious" enough for this aircraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have anyone noticed the small references to his former assiciates in the manual? Things along the line of 'the team has now been enhanced since the last release' and 'for the first time I have been working with true professionals'. :-) Plus he now criticises the photoreal graphics that he used to praise and claims to be at the forefront of a new panel graphics revolution.Well, it is something I remember clearly from the R4D era, Roy Chaffin's products are always served with a bit of ego. But hey, the man sure knows how to program gauges! - Oyvind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He penned a release that is at FS Gateway - and the tone was very similar. Sad really. I hope that his airplane doesn't hurt sales of Briefing Time. The musuem certainly needs the money. Seems like bad Karma to me to try to show up a non-profit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the same reaction when I read the manual. However, I think that the panel and aircraft does set a very high standard. It's an outstanding package and a real accomplishment. The jabs at MAAM-SIM are unfortunate because they are unnessary and detract from an otherwise outstanding contribution to flight simming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldnt help but notice that too ! After reading the first couple pages of the manual, I already was getting a "bad taste" in my mouth so to speak. Then to read that there was no VC since the graphics "would not be up to their high standards" I was already disappointed with this package. The best thing I found about this release is the engine sounds, and they are lacking in some areas. May just be my system, but I had no fuel pump sounds after switching them on and I also find it difficult to think that one could hear the flaps or gear being operated in any B-25 due to those big radials. Personally I like the MAAM version better. I guess I must be one of the "not so serious simmers" since I prefer the virtual cockpit along with active camera to get the illusion that I'm flying :) Just my .02 worth. I think I'll go grab my plotter, E-6b, and sectional charts and plan a virtual flight to Oshkosh in Briefing Time.Darrell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like we are judging the work by the tone of the readme and the packages comparison against a payware offering, rather than on its own merits or judged against other freeware.Is that right? Shouldn't we be simply judging it on its own merits and forget that a payware B-25 also exists? So much time in these forums is spent taking apart those who steam in to upset the freeware developers that perhaps we are forgetting to apply the same principles to this freeware release?So it doesn't have a VC. But it does have VFR and IFR panels for both pilot and co-pilot, it does have surround views including bomb aimers position, side gunner AND tail gunner and gauges which can even be seen by my tired old eyes without a microscope. It really moves the ballpark forward for FREEWARE in the same way that the Briefing Time release does for PAYWARE. After that, further comparisons are pointless, serious simmers into this kind of thing will get both anyway, and I can't see how a freeware release some time after the payware release can affect the commercial success of the latter. By the same token you could argue that `Briefing Time` should have been released earlier so as not to get tied up in the fanfare of FSACOF? Didn't see anyone putting that theory forward when BT was first out. Same argument, different face.I think it rather funny that the egos are fighting it out in this case. It doesn't have any bearing on my enjoyment of the package and the readmes in RCS B-25 are actually very funny!ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ChasMy arguement isnt directed at this aircraft as I dont even have it yet.My arguement is based at a statement that Real pilots or hardcore simmers would shun the VC as if the conventional 2d panels are somehow realistic and the VC is not.The fact of the matter is that for different reasons neither VC or 2D are realistic the 2D because you have to fly the aircraft as if you were sitting in a letter box and the VC for lack of functionality and poor frames.Filling the screen with a mass of pop up windows is also "Not Realistic".This is the silly state that we are in jumping from 2D to VC to pop up windows.Just imagine the real pilot trying to operate an aircraft in that manner.The Real pilot looking forward with his eyes still and head fixed will have around 60 degrees periferal vision either side of parallel lines running forward from his head.Turn his eyeballs right or left with his head still fixed and that will jump to 90-110 degreesUp and down will give 45 degrees from the horizontal with fixed eyeballs. All these figures dont even take into account moving the head left or right up or down.Really all these panel view options are a jack of all trades master of none solution and ONE workable system needs to be presented by MicrosoftPeter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just by looking at the screen shots I can see that this will not hold up to the quality of the Maam B25. I purchased the Maam B25 with a clear consience, knowing I will be assisting in restoring a piece of history. I am very glad I did! I can't blame people for wanting things to be free, but trust me and many others, once you purchase the Maam B25, you will toss your freeware out the window. I am glad that Maam released theirs first so that people would not be too distracted by a free version. I don't have to see it or read it. I am sure RCS worked very hard on their B25, and it is just my feeble opinion that theirs just doesn't have the same flare that Maam's has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you tried IL-2, Peter? (I suppose you have) The VC is still non-clickable, but the clarity is great, and there are effects similar to activecamera built right into the sim. Another detail i like, even though it is annoying at times is that it is impossible for the pilot to turn his head 360 degrees. I think that should be the standard for MS to beat. Even Janes WWII fighters released in 1998 have better VCs than the default fs2002.And how about the clickable VC in Janes F/A-18. At the time that sim was released MS didn't even have VC.- Oyvind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, At the end of the day it's still a TV screen and a few pixels, it's not real life. It's not even close to a real simulator, although it is getting better.BTW the popups make for easier conversion to a wideview multi-monitor setup, according to my young nephew who does such things.But the issue for me is not the quality of the work - we even have critics in this very forum who feel justified in criticising without even downloading it! We seem to be getting swept up in the disagreement between RCS Panels and MAAM, and I really don't give a toss whether `Bill` loves `Roy`, or `Russ` hates `Alan`, I just think we should accord this product the same level playing field as other freeware offerings, and let the egos go fight it out in a muddy field somewhere. If the worst that can be said against it is the manual doesn't appeal, then a whole heap of freeware authors ought to be quaking in their boots waiting to be condemned for their spelling mistakes or factual errors! The fact is we simmers don't cast out these people, we publically congratulate them for their contribution - and privately drop it from the hard drive. Why are we treating RCS Panels differently and why are we being allowed to do so by the site owners, when under normal circumstances such flaming sees a thread locked immediately? I hope it isn't due to some pressure on the commercial relationship between Avsim and MAAM as I have always liked to think of Avsim as independent, but some things I have seen here and elswehere suggest it may not be as clear cut as that.ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In reply to Peter,I agree that the VC isn't the ideal solution for the reasons he mentions (fps/limited functionality) but I feel it's a far better solution than the arcade game style 2d panels. I fly almost exclusively in VC mode. Active camera allows me to pan using my trackball, which is something akin to glancing around a cockpit for real. I can watch the threshold & monitor my position all the way through a turn, from base to short final, glancing back to check airspeed as needed. I have keystroke combos programmed for major functions, so theres rarely a need to switch back to the 2d panel or to use pop ups. Of course, active camera has limitations too. With a throttle, stick & trackball to manipulate, another hand would be helpful!LonelyplanetXO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Dan, in all the fuss your question has got a little lost. I have had an e-mail back from Roy Chaffin and it seems most of the main sim sites have been offered the package, but pressure is being brought to bear by MAAM to have it barred. Whatever the rights and wrongs, that's a pretty scummy thing to do to freeware authors.ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't they upload to Avsim just like anyone else? Or will Avsim refuse to put it in the library?As for the independence of the major flightsim sites: Have you read any payware reviews lately? 'nuff said.- Oyvind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Chas,It seems that I lit the blue touch paper for some reason :), the point you state about pressure from MAAM was the reason I brought it up in the first place.Basically I could not give 2 hoots about the petty arguements that seem to be floating around, I would just like to download this package, I am going to leave my computer downloading tonight and see if I can get it by the morning, if not I will give in.Could anybody from AVSIM specify if this file would be ALLOWED to be put in the file library, I think this is a valid question and I understand any affiliation that AVSIM may have with MAAM, but I think that us lowly people who only have dial-up or slow ISDN connection should be able to download it from a good server that supports resuming.Lets hope this does not turn into some ugly flames from people.Dan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah well, that's a completely different question Oyvind:)Anyway, if there's some threat based on some specific accusation of copyright theft, how long would it have taken to see the allegations and check them out? Minutes? Hours? Well the RCS package has been out several days. Plenty of time for the proof to have been supplied and the allegations verified or denied. Why haven't Avsim been on this, seeing as how they're usually so quick to catch this sort of thing? I seem to remember that start to finish the Carenado thing was uncovered, investigated, proven and the story printed in just a matter of days. This can't be much different? Is there an independent outsider who both sides could agree on to arbitrate? Perhaps a graphical specialist with no interest in either side and no commercial ties to any organistion? How about Lennart Arvidsson if it's a textures thing, or one of the DreamFleet team if it's gauges or panels?ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan, Are you in the UK? I can burn a CD for you if you are, but postage elsewhere might get a little expensive!ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why haven't Avsim been on this, seeing as how they're usually so quick to catch this sort of thing? I seem to remember that start to finish the Carenado thing was uncovered, investigated, proven and the story printed in just a matter of days. This can't be much different? "Who says we aren't? Rabble rousing here Chas?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Could anybody from AVSIM specify if this file would be ALLOWED to be put in the file library, I think this is a valid question and I understand any affiliation that AVSIM may have with MAAM, but I think that us lowly people who only have dial-up or slow ISDN connection should be able to download it from a good server that supports resuming."Simple answer: the file is contested in both copyright and intellectual property. Until that contention is removed, as per our long standing policy, we will not post this file to the AVSIM library. As for the veracity of the policy, ask any author who has contacted us about a disputed file, and they will attest to both the degree to which we enforce that, and the fact that we either remove or do not allow contested files."Lets hope this does not turn into some ugly flames from people."I hope so too, because if it does, it will get removed in a heart beat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please be careful people, You could all end up in Roy's'Hall of Shame'.Jan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Who says we aren't? Rabble rousing here Chas?Sorry, don't understand the expression Tom, but if it means what I think then I dont think I would describe Avsim staffers as `rabble`! Anyway, you still haven't said you are! But can you give us some clue as to how much longer this investigation might take? ChasW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see all these people stop acting like kids. Everyone that has purchased the MAAM version is defending it and are saying Roy is some a reincarnation of the devil, but the real reason is to protect their interest. They don't want to have the feeling that a freeware version is as good, or better than the payware one (yes the one they spend their lovely money on). Just grow up, and stop saying that the RCS version is total crap, when you KNOW that it is a VERY complete and quality package even compared to a payware aircraft. Accept the facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OyvindYes I do have IL2 which is a very well thought out and polished combat sim.I would love to see what those guys could do with a GA type sim.Considering a combat sim has to have good frame rates and fluidity they have added a lot of detail to their VCs and some clever illusions of movement to give the impression of accelerating decelerating climbing and descending.It is the level of thought placed into the IL2 cockpits which need to be placed into MSFS to get around the square monitor restrictions.We need to simulate periferal views.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this