But notice that LAdamson isn't even going to try.

 

You've given him a task that you couldn't do yourself, then use a refusal to respond to justify that he's your enemy.

 

I've always found him to be reasonable, even when I didn't necessarily agree with him. I never tried to change his mind, only to explain where I stood so he'd understand. If the points should come up again in the future, I'll explain another way. I'm patient. I know he's not my enemy, even if we might disagree. Because in the end, we're talking about different things and there is a lot of common ground.

 

Please take care not to let it get to the point where no dissenting opinions are tolerated. Agree to disagree, if necessary.

 

Hook

OK let me amend my previous statement under number 1 change....

 

1. Add in Tessellation support

About X-Plane and Tessellation (because at least in theory, its planned to be included one distant day B) ), just search on Ben Supniks Blog this word:

http://developer.x-plane.com/?s=Tessellation

You've given him a task that you couldn't do yourself, then use a refusal to respond to justify that he's your enemy.

 

I probably could, and Goran certainly could. On the flip side, I bet if I asked LAdamson to give us a list of 6 negatives about the flight model, he wouldn't be able to respond fast enough. The fact that he can do one and not the other is reason to question his objectivity.

 

And he's my "enemy"? I don't know whatever gave you that outrageous idea. He's merely someone I have good reason to disagree with. I harbor no feelings towards him beyond that. I have no problem with dissenting opinions. I, however, do have a problem with someone who regularly visits this forum but is apparently loath to say one positive word about X-Plane.

I, however, do have a problem with someone who regularly visits this forum but is apparently loath to say one positive word about X-Plane.

 

One could argue that this sort of behavior is akin to trolling. And it's not even so much that he doesn't have anything good to say about XP, it's that he goes out of his way to highlight the negatives, as if to try to convince others to steer clear from it. Usually it happens in threads where the tone is generally upbeat. Kinda like a bat signal going off alerting him to a situation that he needs to handle, lest this positive speech about XP gets out of hand.

 

Point out your beefs with the sim if you have to, but my goodness, the thing has a demo that people can check out and draw their own conclusions from!

I probably could, and Goran certainly could.

 

I'm waiting.

 

I usually ignore negative stuff about any flight models. Or pretty much anything about physics models in aircraft, for that matter. Most of it is traceable to PEBKAC. Every so often an actual problem slips through, like the ability to fly knife edge for long distances without loss of altitude in earlier versions of FSX... with your nose on the horizon. Some of the stuff people complain about borders on the bizarre.

 

Usually it happens in threads where the tone is generally upbeat.

 

If someone is bashing FSX in a wonderfully upbeat manner, or the... enthusiasm... gets too far out of hand, to the point of being misleading, then expect a response. Someone's gonna throw the BS flag on that play. You're lucky it doesn't get to the point it was in the archived Flight forum. Go read that some time and count your blessings.

 

I've seen videos from XPlane that look really really good. The sim has a lot going for it. Considering it's an effort by a very small shop, it's phenomenal. It's not finished, but it's getting better all the time. I think it can weather a bit of criticism. If someone says something that's not true, or at least misleading, then gently give the correct information without attacking the person. Educate them. If someone says something that IS true, then handle it in a mature manner. Damage control does not include the constant arguments I've seen here, and those just serve to entrench both sides.

 

At the end of the day, we're all flight simmers. We're all on the same side.

 

Hook

I usually ignore negative stuff about any flight models

 

I'm feeling ignored :-(

 

:-)

 

That's what I do most of the time, and I am getting bored of myself... Even my new love has revealled a few flight dynamics inconsistencies, and prop effects probelms too :-( oops!

 

I should really start to accept sims as they are, and try to profit the most from them instead of this continuous, probably useless, search for the Holy Graal...

I probably could, and Goran certainly could. On the flip side, I bet if I asked LAdamson to give us a list of 6 negatives about the flight model, he wouldn't be able to respond fast enough.

 

For starters, you use the term flight model. Flight model for what? All of X-Plane? I'm willing to bet that many wouldn't know a good flight model from a bad one, and can easily just use it as a blanket & generalized term for all. I've often said that both XP & FSX have both good & bad. Just don't try to tell me that XP is all good, or that somehow it's superior (due to blade element) to the good models from the competition.

 

I really feel that I'm dealing with some who really are not aware of the differences in flight models, and I'm also dealing with some who will use specific videos or screen shots in attempt to prove a point. I really had to tear into Goren at Flightsim com, after he put up a video of a Cessna 172 landing in turbulence in an attempt to prove that landings are always a "bouncy" affair with the pilot constantly making wild adjustments to get to the ground. It was a response to some over done ground turbulence in XP.

 

I do think that some of you actually have a problem with my "neutral" thoughts on flight models between XP & FSX. If I don't come out & say that "blade element" is superior to look up tables, then somehow I'm the enemy. It doesn't seem to matter that my more recent XP purchase ( since XP 10) was the Carenado Bonanza, because Geoff Applegate thought it has some good flight dynamics. He's a good judge of that, as he's owned a real Bonanza single engine. On the other hand, it appears it has used some "artificial stability". Goren doesn't believe in artificial stability. As far as I'm concerned, desktop flight models are artificial to start with, and some artificial stability doesn't bug me in the least. I'll use it any time I feel it's necessary.

 

L.Adamson

I do think that some of you actually have a problem with my "neutral" thoughts on flight models between XP & FSX.

 

Oh, come off it. If you were truly neutral then you would have as many good things to say about X-Plane 10 as bad, but even when you're ostensibly trying to say something positive you deliver backhanded compliments with loaded terms like "artificial stability".

 

But since praising the flight model is apparently too tough a challenge for you, maybe you could give us a list of six substantial things you think X-Plane 10 does well. Like I said, I'm looking for something more meaningful than "the ground textures are nice". I just want to see if you can do it.

even when you're ostensibly trying to say something positive you deliver backhanded compliments with loaded terms like "artificial stability".

 

Remember Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and Marvin? A robot with an artificial leg. Same thing here. I find nothing wrong with the term "artificial stability". It's one way to describe how the F-16's fly by wire system keeps the inherently unstable (and thus maneuverable) plane doing what the pilot wants. We often have to use some form of artificial stability in other flight sims; in FSX it might include raising the MOI or using an external joystick/yoke/rudder response curve editor.

 

But since praising the flight model is apparently too tough a challenge for you, maybe you could give us a list of six substantial things you think X-Plane 10 does well. Like I said, I'm looking for something more meaningful than "the ground textures are nice". I just want to see if you can do it.

 

If I were him, I'd ignore that. And I'm still waiting for 6 good things about XP's flight model from you. I get the feeling that no matter what he said, you'd use it to attack him. This is why you're not going to get an answer.

 

Apparently he does think XP does a lot of things well, as he's bought a payware aircraft for it.

 

If you asked the question in a less confrontational manner, and you didn't have a history of attacking him, you'd probably get a good answer. Get everyone to back off the attacks, make friends with the guy, and try again. Otherwise it's "Lower your shield, Knave so I can stick you in the gullet."

 

Hook

Here's a link to a great post that should do a good job of selling a few copies of XPlane.

 

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/396403-holy-smoke-batman-x-plane-10-global-in-64-bits/page__st__150#entry2576337

 

Hook

I really had to tear into Goren at Flightsim com, after he put up a video of a Cessna 172 landing in turbulence in an attempt to prove that landings are always a "bouncy" affair with the pilot constantly making wild adjustments to get to the ground. It was a response to some over done ground turbulence in XP.

 

You did? Link, please? I honestly have no recollection of this.

Aside from that, if you can smoothly land a C172 in turbulence, you're a much better pilot than most pilots I know.

Goren doesn't believe in artificial stability. As far as I'm concerned, desktop flight models are artificial to start with, and some artificial stability doesn't bug me in the least. I'll use it any time I feel it's necessary.

 

L.Adamson

 

I have actually had a rather large dialogue with Geof over the last few days. He was talking about the stability sliders in X-Plane (which I have no problem with whatsoever). I was talking about the artificial stability addition in Planemaker, where it is possible to adjust control surface dampening. A complete misunderstanding and 2 totally separate areas. So your last statement is moot.

I would also appreciate it if you stopped misquoting me. You have done it on several occasions now. I never said I don't believe in artificial stability. I said artificial stability shouldn't be used if the real aircraft doesn't have it. It is considered a "cheat". I will admit that the word "cheat" may be a harsh word, seeing as the definition of "cheat" is gaining an unfair advantage by using something that is not available to others. Artificial stability is available to everyone. But I still wouldn't use it unless I have exhausted all other avenues.

Please Larry, I've asked you countless times, before you misquote me or anyone else, do a search for the post with my quote in it first, and then link to it.

Don't just spout off a misquote. If you're not sure, and couldn't be bothered doing a search, better then to leave it alone.

You did? Link, please? I honestly have no recollection of this.



Forget it. I went to the other forum, and ended up reading your interview. You did okay, and I never researched farther.

 

And P.S. --- For those doubters............I'm sure that X-Plane will be in my future flight sim portfolio. Just not the default RVs....

 

L.Adamson

If you asked the question in a less confrontational manner, and you didn't have a history of attacking him...

 

Excuse me? I have a history of attacking him? That accusation is blatantly false. Please don't tell me you're adopting LAdamson's habit of misquoting people and attacking straw men.

 

The only point I've been making in this thread is that I have never seen LAdamson make a positive comment about X-Plane 10 -- even when directly asked -- and in fact he often goes out of his way to make negative comments. Just keep that mind when you read his posts.

 

Edit: Hmmm... and now that I've caught with some of your past posts in various other sections of this website, I see that I was right to question your motives for visiting this forum and jumping in to defend LAdamson. You were a pretty ardent defender of Microsoft Flight before it was shutdown and have been very critical of X-Plane for some time. I'll just leave it at that.

I have never seen LAdamson make a positive comment about X-Plane 10

 

I'm sure that X-Plane will be in my future flight sim portfolio.

I've often said that both XP & FSX have both good & bad.

 

That's just from this page.

 

Here we've got a guy who *likes* XPlane, but because he's not gushing over it and isn't afraid to throw the BS flag, he has to be attacked? I'll throw the BS flag too: you've demanded he make a list that you yourself couldn't make.

 

Apparently you're going through my posts and picking and choosing what supports your arguments. That's fine with me, but why are you arguing in the first place? Especially with LAdamson? It would serve your purposes better to just ignore him. And like all the other arguments, it just serves to bury any useful information, both positive and negative.

 

Hook