Carenado

[martin-w 3,235]

2 hours ago, OzWhitey said:

None of those things are as bad as people who forget to put the apostrophe in "it's".

🙂

 

 

Negative! That's a simple error. Mistakes are allowed because we are all human. Trendy way's to say things though should be illegal. 

[Chock 17,769]

3 hours ago, martin-w said:

Starting sentences with "so".

Try telling that to Peter Gabriel 🤣

So is a conjunction (and an adverb), but there's nothing actually incorrect in starting a sentence with a conjunction. Like all words, 'so' has a meaning and function, if its use in speech or print serves its function to communicate adequately, then it has been used correctly.

Gramatically, we might perhaps more correctly (in the traditional sense) write 'Thus,' or 'In which it is explained...' rather than 'So', but language evolves, and upon my word Sir, verily doth things fall out of fashion in their utility.

Much of why people claim we cannot start a sentence with a conjunction, is that they had this notion drilled into them years ago at school, in English lessons which were part of the incongruous 'Three Rs'. Like all rules however, they are 'for the obedience of fools, and the guidance of wise men'.

Using so at the start of a sentence can help to emphasise something, for example, we might write: 'The plane was on fire, so I bailed out.', however, 'The plane was on fire. So I bailed out.' has more dramatic emphasis and adds urgency when there is a slightly longer pause before its use, since it makes the reader think 'c'mon, what are you waiting for? Get out of that plane!'

Where its use is harder to condone, but still not incorrect, is in how much its use has crept into everyday speech, particularly by TV interviewers...

'So, how are you?'

'So. I was watching TV...'

'So Tom, what's the new Top Gun movie about?'.

Structurally, the use of so in these instances, is being used to say: 'right then, I've finished with what I was previously dealing with, and now you have my full attention...'. Some people might instead clap their hands and say 'Now then!'

But using a conjunction such as 'so', to distance a preceding sentence when the purpose of a conjunction is to join things up, is a bit silly. I think that's the issue. Plus the fact that in every one of those above examples, the word so could cheerfully be removed without altering the meaning of the sentence at all.

So, there's nothing wrong with using so; the problem is really in over-using it, particularly when it is largely unnecessary. Not that being necessary in a sentence is a rule of writing either, in moderation, it's often what makes it interesting.

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by Chock

[martin-w 3,235]

8 minutes ago, Chock said:

Try telling that to Peter Gabriel 🤣

So is a conjunction (and an adverb), but there's nothing actually incorrect in starting a sentence with a conjunction. Like all words, 'so' has a meaning and function, if its use in speech or print serves its function to communicate adequately, then it has been used correctly.

 

 

 

Grrr... I don't like it. Should be illegal. 

 

Quote

So, there's nothing wrong with using so; the problem is really in over-using it, particularly when it is largely unnecessary.

 

Now you are getting with the program. 👍 It's a fad, almost a fashion. These things spread like a disease. It's like the rising inflection. Upspeak or whatever nonsense they call it. Hate to sound sexist but it does seem to be the girls that get infected with this stuff. 

And why do we in the UK have to copy Americans? Don't get me wrong, I love America and Americans (except the occupants of the White House). But why are we in the UK calling people "bruh" and "dude"?

 

Any ideas? Whats it all about Mr Chock?

[LHookins 3,103]

Something very funny... a guy on a forum was complaining bitterly about people starting a sentence with a conjunction.  Then he said, "Yet many people do."  I almost fell off my chair laughing and commended him.  Then found out he didn't realize what he'd done.  Which was even funnier. 😄 

Hook

[Chock 17,769]

17 minutes ago, martin-w said:

Any ideas? Whats it all about Mr Chock?

It's so that when they beg to come back into the Union owing to finally losing the will to live over their current incumbent's Twittter madness, we can say: 'not until you've learned to use adverbs properly, started drinking tea, and stopped saying gotten. And the word you are looking for, is aeroplane.'' 🤣

Edited August 15, 2020 by Chock

[hangar 661]

1 hour ago, LHookins said:

Carenado may or may not be able to achieve that, let's wait and see

Heh, lets not and say we did 🙂

By their own admission, their only goal is to provide aircraft that are entertainment oriented and only very lossely based off the real aircraft. They are in no way striving for properly behaving planes, whether it be in modeled systems nor in flight dynamics. If they release a plane where something is broken, that they intended to have working, then they will patch those specifics...but otherwise they are proud to provide (and rightfully so, as there is obviously a huge market for it) control+E aircraft for the MSFS.

Their goal...again, by their own words in countless emails I've seen over the years of folks complaining is to meet the wants/needs of the casual simmers. This is exactly why they dont care about good flying planes with well modeled systems...their market audience doesn't care about it either.

Now as far as XP is concerned...it's much the same...but with a slight difference. They used to have a separate developer that ported all of their MS based planes over to the XP platform...and he used to take alot of extra time with those ports as it was his only job...and while those planes were still essentially systems-less, they often flew better (although still off the  mark way too often and never fixed). Now they even got rid of him (and he actually cared, a great deal).

Carenado has both fans and also users who feel ripped off because their ad copy sounds so good and the planes look so good and they expect it to be just as gorgeous under the hood when it really is not. But it's not supposed to be, and if we all haven't learned that by now then there will surely be more disappointment and bad mouthing to come, unfortunately.

In a way I feel bad for them...but in a way I don't...because their marketing efforts and ad copy clearly doesn't state what their complaint email responses often have. They know that their ad copy is geared towards alot more than just casuals so that they grab those extra sales...so let them take the heat, IMO.

But personally, I don't expect anything different  of them than what I've seen over the past 20-25 years. It's their business model, and it's a fine one...what isn't fine is how they market it and lie about it.

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by hangar

[LHookins 3,103]

There is another popular developer that I particularly dislike, but I won't be bashing them on forums.

I'd personally like a better variety of aircraft than what is in default MSFS, and if Carenado provides them I may buy them.  If someone else provides them that's fine too.  A2A is very slow in producing new aircraft and while I'll be buying whatever they make, I want something to fly while I'm waiting.

And if the first new aircraft I buy from Carenado offends me as much as the one I bought from the previously mentioned developer, I won't be buying any more.  But said developer set a very high bar in that regard so I don't expect that to happen. 🙂 

Hook

Edited August 15, 2020 by LHookins

[hangar 661]

5 minutes ago, LHookins said:

A2A is very slow in producing new aircraft and while I'll be buying whatever they make, I want something to fly while I'm waiting.

yep, therein lies the trap, hehe. We've all been there.

 

5 minutes ago, LHookins said:

offends me as much as the one I bought from the previously mentioned developer, I won't be buying any more

Now that has me verrry curious 🙂 I'd love to guess...I have my own opinions who it could be, but yea I won't open the can, hehe.

Edited August 15, 2020 by hangar

[LHookins 3,103]

2 minutes ago, hangar said:

yep, therein lies the trap, hehe. We've all been there.

It's not a trap.  My expectations aren't that high.  If I buy a plane and fly it for as many hours as I paid dollars, I've gotten my money's worth.

The Carenado Cessna 337 was quite good.  The original version had a couple of fuel switches wrong but they were corrected in a patch, and they never bothered me anyway.  If subsequent purchases are as good then I'll be happy.

Never believe the hype.  Look behind the scenes and read between the lines in reviews and videos.  Read the developer's forums to see if there is anything you need to know.  Don't let the stars in your eyes blind you to possible problems.  Don't expect perfection, and no matter what gee-whiz features an aircraft has, make sure they got the important parts reasonable.

Hook

[martin-w 3,235]

39 minutes ago, Chock said:

It's so that when they beg to come back into the Union owing to finally losing the will to live over their current incumbent's Twittter madness, we can say: 'not until you've learned to use adverbs properly, started drinking tea, and stopped saying gotten. And the word you are looking for, is aeroplane.'' 🤣

 

👍

[LHookins 3,103]

America and the UK:  Two countries separated by a common language.

Hook

[hangar 661]

12 minutes ago, LHookins said:

The Carenado Cessna 337 was quite good

Yes, they had a few good flyers over the years...at one point I think they had brent stolle (not sure of thats correct spelling) doing some of their flight dynamics and whatever he touched resulted in praise...I think perhaps the 337 was his work. He did a few others as well. I wish he never stopped.

[OzWhitey 3,353]

3 hours ago, LHookins said:

Depends on who foots the bill. 😄 

I only have one Carenado plane, the Cessna 337, and I like it.  It was my first ever payware aircraft for FSX.  And I didn't have to pay extra for the P3Dv4 version. 😄 

I may be buying more for MSFS considering that A2A aircraft will be slow in coming.

Hook

I’ve got a lot of Carenados. The 337 is the one i’ve flown the most.

[LHookins 3,103]

4 minutes ago, OzWhitey said:

I’ve got a lot of Carenados. The 337 is the one i’ve flown the most.

The 337 is very special to me.  When I was taking flying lessons around 1970, I looked for a plastic model kit to help me visualize what was happening.  The Cessna 337 was the only one on the shelf at the time.

It was probably the first model I built that I detailed to that extent.  I did the entire interior, matched paint color to the decals, everything I could think of at the time.  Yeah, the plane looked a little odd compared to a Cessna 150, but it had plenty of character and I fell in love with it.  I was excited to see a real one once and the Air Force pilot described it as a "good ash and trash plane."  Somehow it was smaller than I'd expected.

When Carenado released their 337, and even with the same paint scheme as the model I'd built, there was NO WAY I could resist buying it.  It was the first aircraft I got for FSX, payware or freeware.

I had previously flown mostly in the stock Goose, and you know what *that* looked like.  What do you think was my first impression of the 337? 😄 

So trash talk Carenado all you want.  I still love that 337.

Hook

[OzWhitey 3,353]

1 hour ago, LHookins said:

The 337 is very special to me.  When I was taking flying lessons around 1970, I looked for a plastic model kit to help me visualize what was happening.  The Cessna 337 was the only one on the shelf at the time.

It was probably the first model I built that I detailed to that extent.  I did the entire interior, matched paint color to the decals, everything I could think of at the time.  Yeah, the plane looked a little odd compared to a Cessna 150, but it had plenty of character and I fell in love with it.  I was excited to see a real one once and the Air Force pilot described it as a "good ash and trash plane."  Somehow it was smaller than I'd expected.

When Carenado released their 337, and even with the same paint scheme as the model I'd built, there was NO WAY I could resist buying it.  It was the first aircraft I got for FSX, payware or freeware.

I had previously flown mostly in the stock Goose, and you know what *that* looked like.  What do you think was my first impression of the 337? 😄 

So trash talk Carenado all you want.  I still love that 337.

Hook

The Carenado 337 was one of my favorite sim planes around the p3d v3 era. Used to perform very well in that sim.

I started reminiscing after that post, and have spent the last hour looking at how much an actual 337 costs (spent last night chatting with a couple of PC-12 pilots about private ownership costs for their personal GA aircraft, so it was kind of on my mind).

Anyway, here’s the 337 i just showed my daughter. https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?category_level1=Multi+Engine+Piston&make=CESSNA&model=P337H&listing_id=2365942&s-type=aircraft
 

She seems to think she could get a condo for the same price, so I didn’t get much support!

Just kicking tyres with the 337 idea, but like you Hook I do have some affection for this type.