On 16 Dec 2008, at 13:38, Heiko Schulz wrote: > @John again: Sorry, but I'm not happy with your type of criticism. I > coulden't see anything comitting to FGFS from you yet, so I wonder > if I should really take you seriously! > It was about 3 months ago when I finally decide to update the 3d- > model and the panel of the c172p. I announced it on the list, had > pics and the model itself for download - and just two answers which > came from my "home community", the german flightGear community. I'm > at least quite happy that one of them has a ppl and fly this > aircraft regularly, so I could get some infos. But I coulden't get > any flight nmanual nor having one real c172p as master! > > Indeed, I was wondering several times if this is really a good idea > to go on and not to stop, and now I think of it again! > > It seems to me that you only can run something down, than really > bringing in something positive. That makes the project FlightGear > not better- it makes it worse and unserious!
This seems to be getting rather personal. As far as I can tell, John 'reviewed' the C172 in much the same way a commercial reviewer would, if given a C172 for MSFS. In doing so, he's raised some bugs which are generic to all of FG (lack of runway lighting and position init bugs), some genuine C172 issues, and some opinions about which C172 we are modelling (the comments about whether a GPS is/isn't accurate). Heiko, as far as I can tell, was hoping for constructive feedback about his work on the C172 panel and model, which is a rather different thing. Especially since, as he noted, it's a work in progress. Clearly Heiko's work on the C172 is appreciated, and obviously it will always be difficult to decide what constitutes an accurate C172 in many areas. And reporting issues is useful as well, so long as they don't come across as an attack on someone's hard work. For many of the C172 issues, someone really needs to dig in to the code (not necessarily C++) and see why the battery voltage (for example) is wrong, or copy an EGT gauge over from another aircraft. It'd be lovely if bug reports were accompanied by some analysis (like my Bravo/GPWS investigation) of this rather than just the user-level feedback. Obviously that's much more time consuming, but *someone* has to do that work, ultimately. Regards, James ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
