The Dreamfleet Baron - just not right

[Guest Ricardo Sevarant]

Instead of trading endless sophomoric rhetoric with the usual crowd of 'counter-posters' that love to congregate around any discussion here as long as they can try to get the original thread locked down because they disagree with a particular viewpoint (sigh).......Make a video of your DF Baron landing from a perspective that shows power setting, airspeed, descent rate, etc. My original statement at the beginning of this thread made the inference that the DF Baron lands at FAR too high of a nose up attitude when real-world power settings on landing are applied. I further imply that the only way to land the DF Baron at the proper real-world nose up attitude is to hold power all the way through touchdown. This is incorrect.If you disagree, please make a FS2004 video proving me wrong and provide link to same.A picture (video) is worth a thousand words. In this case worth a thousand more thread entries bantering back and forth between individuals trying to gain the high ground in an agrument that never stops until they get the thread locked. Thanks.

[Arklight1 140]

>Instead of trading endless sophomoric rhetoric with the usual>crowd of 'counter-posters' that love to congregate around any>discussion here as long as they can try to get the original>thread locked down because they disagree with a particular>viewpoint (sigh).......>>Make a video of your DF Baron landing from a perspective that>shows power setting, airspeed, descent rate, etc. My>original statement at the beginning of this thread made the>inference that the DF Baron lands at FAR too high of a nose up>attitude when real-world power settings on landing are>applied. I further imply that the only way to land the DF>Baron at the proper real-world nose up attitude is to hold>power all the way through touchdown. This is incorrect.>>If you disagree, please make a FS2004 video proving me wrong>and provide link to same.>>A picture (video) is worth a thousand words. In this case>worth a thousand more thread entries bantering back and forth>between individuals trying to gain the high ground in an>agrument that never stops until they get the thread locked. >Thanks. *Sigh* That video you posted doesn't provide any hard numbers to compare by. It's a video from the right seat and nothing more. The poster above you already listed the information not available.There is a Baron pilot in this thread who has already commented on the accuracy of the DF product and yet you persist, completely ignoring his comments. We have a pilot in here sharing his views, and you have a video you found on the internet lacking just about all the information needed to form a coherent arguement. I don't know how to explain it any more plainly then that.So far, your argument has been nothing more then baseless and non-sensical. You have ONE video that has little to no information available. Essentially, you come across somewhere along the lines of, "this video looks different to me then what I see in-game. The Baron in-game is completely wrong." It almost plays out like a children's book. Your entire argument just flat out lacks any concrete evidence of anything. Am I missing another thread where you listed all the numbers of the aircraft in the video?Also, why haven't you posted this in the DF forum if your feelings are so adamant? Lastly, how many hours do you have in an actual Baron (the type modeled by DF)?

[Guest Ricardo Sevarant]

Hello Geofa,Unfortunately, a search of the forum you mention does not yield any of the landing videos you describe.

[Guest Ricardo Sevarant]

Prove my observations wrong and post your video link here. Thanks.

[Guest]

You know the answer to all that: he's just out to make trouble. He doesn't care for reality, only for what he perceives in his ignorance reality must be. And maybe he cares about harming others, in that he WANTS to harm others.

[Arklight1 140]

>Prove my observations wrong and post your video link here. >Thanks.We are all still waiting for some decent observations.

[Arklight1 140]

>You know the answer to all that: he's just out to make>trouble. >He doesn't care for reality, only for what he perceives in his>ignorance reality must be. And maybe he cares about harming>others, in that he WANTS to harm others.Agreed. The more I read his bantar, the more it reminds me of just plain trolling.

[LAdamson 240]

I went through the comments under the Cheyenne thread, which included power setting problems on approach, too much power on climbout, problems with slipping, and crosswinds.I then spent a half hour last evening with Baron, and he was incorrect on every statement. I even threw in more passengers than default, and off loaded some fuel to move the CG around. Using a final approach speed of around 100 kts., I could easily bring the nose up for a roundout & flare, with only minor power adjustments, on the "low" side of the throttle, just as Geof. Applegate described. I then used the replay mode over and over to critque those "beautiful" landings from every angle. BTW, with ANY highly wing loaded aircraft, you can always keep the approach speed higher, to have enough elevator in the flare to prevent "falling through", with just idle power in the flare, but thats not what we want here.It was also suggested in the Cheyenne thread, that Dreamfleet throws out these aircraft, and then tosses a stamp of pilot approval on top. Nothing could be farther from the truth! Dreamfleet goes out of their way, to get a good cross section of pilots during the beta testing. The beta testing can last for months. The process is extremely well structured and a professional level. Problems suggested in this thread, just don't slip by! In the end, the author of this thread does not seem to have a clue, has obviously not flown real aircraft to the extent of actual solo landings, let alone an airplane with high wing loadings, and now does appear to be trolling, if he keeps up with this nonsense.L.Adamson

[Geofa 108]

No search-Screenshots forum/real shots -- a couple posts down have all the links.