Shhhh...don't tell the pilot, but I think his lower wing is about to fall off.....
Cheers
Shessi
That is why the ropes are there................... And that's most probably why this plane ended as a monoplane
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
-
Special Server Maintenance
Just when you think you have everything running some what better...
You get a message from the Hosting company. Short story they need to move us to a new server. I have been working with them to plan a good date for all concerned. Here is what we have come up with as a schedule.
- November 4th 17:00 -5UTC shut off the forums and start backup proceedures. During this time there will be no access to the forums or the Resource Section.
- November 5th Continue with Backups and download same until complete.
- November 6th 7:00 turn over server to hosting company to move system to new server
- November 7th - 8th restore backups and upgrade forum software.
If all goes well we should be back online on November 8th.
To keep you updated we will post updates on AVSIM forums.
Thank you for your support.
FS2004 Screenshots Here!!!
- Thread starter ZsoltB
- Start date
That is why the ropes are there................... And that's most probably why this plane ended as a monoplane
This is by, the probably nearly defunct, FCS. They brought us the very nice Wellington (the texs were quite extreme though) (I bought), followed up by one of the most atrocious pieces of sim software I have ever seen..their Sunderland (which I also bought, and immediately regretted doing so). And they then issue this model, and no one saw the wing strut issue!!
Thier product quality control and testing is abysmal, I'm quite shocked that, as a commercial company, they can do this sort of thing??!! Mind you when I did re-vamp Alphasim's Catalinas I discovered that the wing struts were also not actually modelled attached to the fuselage...dohhh!!, so even the great and the good can get it wrong. I'm just surprised these sim model companies don't come here or other flight sim forums and ask several 'neutral' simmers to test out thier models, if they do, those testers need an eye test.
The Fury looks very nice, but it's just spoilt by this stupid mistake...frustrating.
Cheers
Shessi
Thier product quality control and testing is abysmal, I'm quite shocked that, as a commercial company, they can do this sort of thing??!! Mind you when I did re-vamp Alphasim's Catalinas I discovered that the wing struts were also not actually modelled attached to the fuselage...dohhh!!, so even the great and the good can get it wrong. I'm just surprised these sim model companies don't come here or other flight sim forums and ask several 'neutral' simmers to test out thier models, if they do, those testers need an eye test.
The Fury looks very nice, but it's just spoilt by this stupid mistake...frustrating.
Cheers
Shessi
The one below is another one of my favourite bi-planes. And like the Fury it is certainly not a perfect model. So clearly I have something with imperfect models.
BTW many payware and freeware designers have their models tested by members here before they are released. As there are also people who just want to beta test to get a free model, this is often not shared with the public.
Cheers,
Huub
BTW many payware and freeware designers have their models tested by members here before they are released. As there are also people who just want to beta test to get a free model, this is often not shared with the public.
Cheers,
Huub
Motormouse
SOH-CM-2025
Rant mode ON: And that is the problem, those who only want a free model don't know how to test, and end up skewing the responses. Sure, they play with it at their favourite airport, and go "oo ah" at all the eye candy, and won't give a developer true feedback for fear of being dropped from the beta tester clique.
My particular bone of contention is how it works in sim;
I have steered a few developers, especially when it's been with a type I have a rw familiarity with. In fact one developer (no names, no pack drill) was moderately surprised when I provided a copy of the rw manufacturers flight test schedule for his production. When he later released it to the clique working to those numbers, they complained. There are many good models spoiled by poor handling. Rant mode OFF
Magoo and I worked together on Nigel's Avro series, which seems to have been well received.
Back to screenshots now?
Ttfn
Pete
Below a screenshot from the FSX version. The models are indeed different. It seems the FS9 version is a not fully finished version of the model.
Cheers,
Huub
rgatkinson
Charter Member
FSX Fury - now that's doing this beautiful aircraft justice. And the pale yellow skin just adds to the splendour. A real shame those strut-mountings never made it to the FS9 model. An oversight or just corners cut to get it to market? I guess we'll never know.
I don't suppose the FSX model could be converted to FS9 could it?
Taff
I don't suppose the FSX model could be converted to FS9 could it?
Taff
I don't think so as the FSX model consists of an external and internal model. Without the source file(s) i don't think it is possible.
Cheers,
Huub
