As I've been just banned from the PT6 topic (I'm not even allowed to read it :lol:), here's my final AVSIM post

 

 

 

Bye all

In regards to your earlier post: "Found another basic problem with jet engines.... Thrust increases linear with RPM !!!". I think you might be confusing the relationship between N1% VS throttle position with N1 % VS thrust. N1% VS thrust is not a linear relationship in real life and this is correctly modelled in X-Plane. This is in contrast to N1 % VS throttle position which is a relatively linear relationship as shown by your graph. I also did a little testing using XPFW's B733 IN X-Plane 9.

 

Hi Bernt

 

Maybe you might reconsider. I for one value your experience and input along with most others who contribute here and I feel sure I'm not the only one. Problem is everyone is very different and we come from all parts of the world so occasionally things get out of control.

 

Anyways I hope you do continue on here.

I think this forum (and X-Plane) need "critical" opinions like bstolle, greggerm, jcomm etc. along with strong supporters like GoranM etc.

Critical opinions about subject matter are fine and welcome, imho as a faceless observer. Being a jack-&@($* about it, on the other hand...

Critical opinions about subject matter are fine and welcome, imho as a faceless observer. Being a jack-&@($* about it, on the other hand...

I don't think anyone could have said it any better.

In regards to your earlier post: "Found another basic problem with jet engines.... Thrust increases linear with RPM !!!". I think you might be confusing the relationship between N1% VS throttle position with N1 % VS thrust. N1% VS thrust is not a linear relationship in real life and this is correctly modelled in X-Plane. This is in contrast to N1 % VS throttle position which is a relatively linear relationship as shown by your graph. I also did a little testing using XPFW's B733 IN X-Plane 9.

 

 

N1 would not normally move in a linear fashion with relationship to throttle position. In the graph you've plotted (right-hand side), it's showing N1 is perfectly linear with regards to throttle position so that at 50% throttle movement you also get 50% of the possible N1 change in the engines. I know of no aircraft that function in such a manner.

I wonder if someone can plot a graph for FSX's engine model.

I wonder if someone can plot a graph for FSX's engine model.

 

I'm certain they can... here's the difference: in FS you can define the throttle to N1 and N1 to N2 relationship to more accurately map an engine's performance curve. Apparently that's not possible within X-Plane itself?

 

Now... how about ya play nice with the discussion... for once.

I'm certain they can... here's the difference: in FS you can define the throttle to N1 and N1 to N2 relationship to more accurately map an engine's performance curve. Apparently that's not possible within X-Plane itself?

 

Actually, it is possible in X Plane. And it's quite easy.

 

Now... how about ya play nice with the discussion... for once.

 

Just because I don't agree with some people, doesn't mean it should be interpreted as not "playing nice."

How about you play nice and not make it personal.

Actually, it is possible in X Plane. And it's quite easy.

 

Is this by creating your own plug-in software to take over the engine performance?? If so... that's neither easy nor the 'same'.

 

 

Just because I don't agree with some people, doesn't mean it should be interpreted as not "playing nice."

How about you play nice and not make it personal.

 

Your very tone in your posts makes it personal... I really wish you'd understand that. When someone posts something they see as an issue with X-Plane... you immediately counter-post, thus starting the disagreement. You don't stop and take the time to really absorb what they're saying. You most definitely never, ever admit they're right... even when they are. So... I'd say what tends to make it personal is your approach. And yes... it's definitely not "playing nice"... that would be true for any of us.

Is this by creating your own plug-in software to take over the engine performance?? If so... that's neither easy nor the 'same'.

 

Yes, and it is easy. I've looked into it myself. And it's not creating plug in software. It's a series of commands by way of a script.

 

 

Your very tone in your posts makes it personal... I really wish you'd understand that. When someone posts something they see as an issue with X-Plane... you immediately counter-post, thus starting the disagreement. You don't stop and take the time to really absorb what they're saying. You most definitely never, ever admit they're right... even when they are. So... I'd say what tends to make it personal is your approach. And yes... it's definitely not "playing nice"... that would be true for any of us.

 

Completely and entirely incorrect. Jim Skorna has criticized the lack of seasons and cities in x plane. I agreed. 100% and unequivocally. I hate the cities. Absolutely. And I have openly voiced my opinion on that in more than 1 forum.

Many people have judged the flight model based on...the default aircraft. I have taken the time to explain what is involved in making flight models and that it is entirely possible to make an accurate flight model and a small handful have acknowledged that and understood it.

There are problems with FSX and there are problems with X Plane. No one in X plane cares about the problems in FSX. Because we go with what we choose to go with. Just because the x plane community prefers x plane, doesn't mean we're wrong in our choice.

Bernt takes the time to complain about something as "basic" as the engine model. Sorry, but there is nothing basic about jet engines. I find it confusing how he can dump a project because of the engine model but not because of a lack of a realistic FMC.

How about instead of complaining about it, he sends his figures and charts to Austin. Whether he fixes it or not, is up to him. However, with so many variables in a jet engine model, what we have to work with in X Plane is acceptable. At least for me it is. Austin provides the ingredients. Developers make the cake. The tools are there.

I said it in another thread. No one minds the criticisms, just don't be a wise-&@($* about it.

Yes, and it is easy. I've looked into it myself. And it's not creating plug in software. It's a series of commands by way of a script.

 

A link or reference to this 'script' you're talking about?

 

Regarding everything else you said... I stand by my statement that you tend to not be civil towards others if they don't tout the wonders of X-Plane.

 

Oh, and if Austin wants a list of bugs... he can pay us. Beta testers at least get a free copy. :Big Grin:

A link or reference to this 'script' you're talking about?

 

Regarding everything else you said... I stand by my statement that you tend to not be civil towards others if they don't tout the wonders of X-Plane.

 

Oh, and if Austin wants a list of bugs... he can pay us. Beta testers at least get a free copy. :Big Grin:

The script is code written for the add on by the developer. The SDK is not the only way to program something for x plane.

Feel free to stand by your statements. I also stand by mine. I'm civil, courteous and respectful to those that are civil, courteous and respectful

You're certainly not obliged to provide a list of bugs for x plane. Although, you'll find that the majority of the x plane community disagrees with your opinion and are more than happy to file bug reports.

The script is code written for the add on by the developer. The SDK is not the only way to program something for x plane.

 

I asked for a link or locatable reference regarding this 'script'. If the SDK is not the only way to program something for X-Plane... feel free to direct me to official information on what other avenues are available for developers. Thus far I've found only SDK information at XSquawkbox.net and rudimentary information at X-Plane.com itself.