Yes Bob, the "purveyors of nonsense" did win that battle. But to say the moderators are incapable of having resolved the issue is inaccurate. Cleaning up both of those threads was #4 on my list, right after helping two people who couldn't log in to their accounts and reporting an SQL error I've been getting when trying to use administrator tools. Tom was just faster than me that day, and decided to remove the whole thread, and I'm not about to argue with him over it. But these same "purveyors" won't win the war because from this point forward I won't be so nice. I'll just start banning accounts if people can't be civil.As for your post, the one which you reviewed the Milviz T-38, it's still here. I can copy it into this thread if you wish.

Please do that, I want to read what the Colonel said before I try this one out.

Just a HU because the original thread for this was deleted too (since the dev itself advertised it).They offer a free scenery and AI package at the T-38A site, just scroll all the way down there and get the following nice things. 1. Edwards AFB (NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center & AI Traffic)2. Vance AFB (1958 Orange/White & AI Traffic)3. Beale AFB (Black Livery & AI Traffic)4. Sheppard AFB (Euro NATO Livery & AI Traffic)5. Randolph AFB (Blue Camo & AI Traffic)6. Nellis AFB (Thunderbirds & AI Traffic)7. Creech AFB (Thunderbirds Practice Facility & AI Traffic)8. Columbus AFB (AI Traffic)9. Reese AFB (AI Traffic, restored to 1996 condition)10. Williams AFB (AI Traffic, restored to military condition)11. Laughlan AFB (AI Traffic)You can use this with or without the T-38 of course.

Still can't land her too successfully. Take off is easy, and flight is easy, but landing is a "bear"!Stan

As it should be. However, and this is clear, once you KNOW how to land the T-38A, landing the upcoming MIlviz Eagle C/E is going to be a breeze. Though fighting it will be... interesting.

Stan, you are not alone of course. But you have help from force feedback, right?Let me assure you, that I'm far away from speaking about easy or 100% successful landings here, but those 'simple' tips from the manual and the quick start guide actually helped much.I don't know if the rw guys train in the same way, but getting to some height and flying around in the landing config gives you a good feel without running any risk of ground contacts.As mentioned in the guide, do some stalls there, hear them (great feature!), feel them and later start operating right at the edge of that envelope while e. g. doing some turns or just watching the descent rate to stay stable.The real guys can feel some more of the plane, so they don't have to watch gauges, we have the gauges only or need some good visual reference point.This should establish quite some experience (as limited by the sim itself of course) and also confidence about what you do not want to hear/feel and also what acts as a warning.I think I have more time in this 'stalling around' state than normal ones so far, so maybe that helps from my laymen's perspective there. :smile:As you see in the bigger manual, this training stuff wasn't easy or short at all, so the rw fellows produced some sweat too.

I was considering buying the T-38A but after watching that video I'm hearing that sound phasing problem that plagues far too many add-ons. If MilViz fixes it in the first service pack I will definitely buy it.

I was considering buying the T-38A but after watching that video I'm hearing that sound phasing problem that plagues far too many add-ons. If MilViz fixes it in the first service pack I will definitely buy it.

Is that what it is I heard in my post below that was on the first page of this topic when I said:

What's going on with those engine sounds starting around 1:38 to 1:55, but peaking at around 1:48. I've head that before with some sound pack on a few addons, but not all. Is that the thing they refer to as the sound cone issue or something to that effect depending on how the audio was recorded?

No one replied to my question, so I didn't know if it was just the audio from my internet computer or that's the way it is.

I am replying now. I had to make 100% sure that the phase shifting is NOT part of the product and is, in fact, part of the recording process. If you listen carefully during the video, the phase shift is apparent throughout.Anyway, we do not have any phase shifting going on in the actual product.

I am replying now. I had to make 100% sure that the phase shifting is NOT part of the product and is, in fact, part of the recording process. If you listen carefully during the video, the phase shift is apparent throughout.Anyway, we do not have any phase shifting going on in the actual product.

I've never experienced any sound phase-shift for this model in the sim either.

I am replying now. I had to make 100% sure that the phase shifting is NOT part of the product and is, in fact, part of the recording process. If you listen carefully during the video, the phase shift is apparent throughout.Anyway, we do not have any phase shifting going on in the actual product.

Thanks for checking that out.

That's a great product. Feels very real. Landings are demanding.First landing, came in too hot. Ballooned. That WOULD have been the moment for a go around. But no. Try to land. Breaking takes forever. Ran off runway. Expensive.Second landing, came in on speed. But too high. Flared too high. Fell out of the sky. Expensive too. And bad for the ego.The next landings were better and great fun.That gradual developing stall buffet sound and shaking are awesome. Little hottie speaks to you.Documentation closely based on original POH with all procedures, checklists, performance tables, etc. The only thing I could wish for is a clear canopy option. But that's no big issue.Congratulations!

Then the purveyors of nonsense have already won. If the moderators are incapable of separating the wheat from the chaff, then why bother posting anything of substance? :(

Bob, that is what the alert button is all about. If we do not get to the problem posts fast enough (and we do have lives outside of AVSIM), then they grow to the situation we had in that topic. If members push the alert button, we can focus on it much earlier. Members here need to take some responsibility; we can't be here 24 / 7. We need you to help us police the forums and remove the idiots as they show themselves.I am going to re-instate the topic, but it will be locked and pruned of the BS posts. It may take me a while to do that.

Bernt, if a guy with quite some competence posts his views on 20 topics and also includes suggestions or possible solutions, this isn't something to run into but to be happy about.If some items form up different opinions, you can discuss them of course and exactly this discussion was intended, because it's useful for all people involved.I wouldn't relate a 20 item list to an overall negative view, but to a detailed one, that's all.I first wondered why another user asked for Bob's view on the T-38, but, after reading, I was very pleased about some 'think about' items. Milviz also reacted open, which did not render any of your fine work useless or bad.You did well there, I think that Bob also mentioned this. Refinement is an evolutionary process, not a sort of war.But I'm still a bit sad about the whole thread being gone now. I understand the reasons from the mod side, but I liked the different or detailed views on most of the pages and I also think that some potential customers could have made use of them, now.

Bob, that is what the alert button is all about. If we do not get to the problem posts fast enough (and we do have lives outside of AVSIM), then they grow to the situation we had in that topic. If members push the alert button, we can focus on it much earlier. Members here need to take some responsibility; we can't be here 24 / 7. We need you to help us police the forums and remove the idiots as they show themselves.I am going to re-instate the topic, but it will be locked and pruned of the BS posts. It may take me a while to do that.

Yah! Way to go Tom!I'm just a bystander in all of this, but that's a GREAT move - thanks Tom.

I was the first person to reply to Bob's comments, and I am a MilViz staff member. I just want to say that we welcomed his feedback right then, and I said "no one could argue with his credentials," and that we would "share this with the entire MilViz team." That happened. We shared his comments and we have sought ways to rationally incorporate his suggestions. We even invited the man to work with us directly to achieve any improvements possible without compromising the overall fidelity of the FDE in the many other flight regimes. But, the process is by no means straightforward or else we would have incorporated those suggestions to begin with. Unfortunately, the thread then got totally hijacked by one member who seemed to dedicate himself to a slash and burn campaign. I certainly wish that never happened, and I cannot imagine anyone who did (other than said member who did it!). Then, he did it in another thread the next day! That got people to wonder what was really motivating this person. I really hope we do not see anything like a repeat of that sad performance.I think the one misconception MilViz wishes to clarify is the belief that somehow we let something out the door that did not represent our very best effort in the FDE. Nothing could be further from the truth. Also, we had two people who had real world T-38 IP experience who worked very closely for half a year to tailor this FDE. These two pilots were not merely "involved" in the project, but totally dedicated, working directly with the FDE modeler, and who both basically had veto power over release and FDE build decisions! Then, we took half a year to tailor the FDE! To be honest, I am willing to put that up against anything that any other organization would be willing to do. We would never want to be seen as trying to twist arms to purchase our products. Each person has to make that personal decision on his own decision points. I would just like to say that having spoken with Bob offline and I am 100% convinced he never wanted his feedback to influence a negative buying decision, and he certainly did not want someone to hijack his words to start a hideous and ugly flame war. The man just has very fond memories of a special aircraft in his career and wants nothing but the very best. So do we! And I would like to think that this dedication to FDE and modeling excellence is appreciated by those customers who have already purchased the jet, and we are going to remain dedicated to correcting any issues our customers have reported. We frankly would never settle for anything else!Ken

I think the one misconception MilViz wishes to clarify is the belief that somehow we let something out the door that did not represent our very best effort in the FDE. Nothing could be further from the truth. Also, we had two people who had real world T-38 IP experience who worked very closely for half a year to tailor this FDE. These two pilots were not merely "involved" in the project, but totally dedicated, working directly with the FDE modeler, and who both basically had veto power over release and FDE build decisions! Then, we took half a year to tailor the FDE! To be honest, I am willing to put that up against anything that any other organization would be willing to do. Ken

Ken - I can only speak as one satisfied user but when I purchased the T-28 I got a finished and exceptional product. I expected, as with most major projects, there would probably be a service pack and that's what I took from Bob's comments. I saw them as poloishing the apple - refinements. IMHO, anyone who thinks you "let something out the door" either has rocks in their head or has some ax to grind.Spent a couple hours today shooting T&G trying some suggestions from Bernt and can't tell you how good it feels to grease a few!!Thanx to all the Milviz crew for a fun a/c!Vic