REALISM RATING F-51D-30NA by HSFX4.1 - Printable Version
+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: Announcements & General Discussions & Hyper Lobby (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=264)
+--- Forum: General Discussions. (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=298)
+--- Thread: REALISM RATING F-51D-30NA by HSFX4.1 (/showthread.php?tid=68754)
+- All-Aircraft-Simulations (https://allaircraftsimulations.com)
+-- Forum: Announcements & General Discussions & Hyper Lobby (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=264)
+--- Forum: General Discussions. (https://allaircraftsimulations.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=298)
+--- Thread: REALISM RATING F-51D-30NA by HSFX4.1 (/showthread.php?tid=68754)
Pages:
1
2
- RedChico - 21.02.2010
Are you an engineer?
Because what you are doing is just stating the obvious, nothing else and you if think you can win the argument by just stating the obvious you are completly wrong.
Unless you present us the reason, the objective of your study, all the calculations, equations, engineering schematics and so on, this is redunctant piece of information.
- ACE-OF-ACES - 21.02.2010
RedChico Wrote:Are you an engineer?LOL
Because what you are doing is just stating the obvious, nothing else and you if think you can win the argument by just stating the obvious you are completly wrong.
Unless you present us the reason, the objective of your study, all the calculations, equations, engineering schematics and so on, this is redunctant piece of information.
You really need to read the pdf before you comment
At least once if not twice
- Murph - 21.02.2010
Ace, Thanks for the comparison. I think your explanation for using the 51B/w75" is quite clear and your weight adjustments make sense given the data available. When and if real world data for the D-30 becomes available, it will be interesting to see how close you got with that.
At least you were up front about how you did it, which is more than can be said for some.
- ACE-OF-ACES - 21.02.2010
Murph Wrote:Ace, Thanks for the comparison. I think your explanation for using the 51B/w75" is quite clear and your weight adjustments make sense given the data available.Thanks Murph!
Good to know that when someone actually takes the time to read it that it make sense
I was starting to get worried there for a min what with the first wave of replies
Granted my spelling and grammar sucks
But than again I am an employed engineer not an out of work english major!
Murph Wrote:When and if real world data for the D-30 becomes available, it will be interesting to see how close you got with that.Yes and if anyone has such data please let me know it is a simple mater to run run the test
Murph Wrote:At least you were up front about how you did it, which is more than can be said for some.Bingo!
Which is something that has been sorely lacking in all the comparisons done by others up to now IMHO
- RedChico - 21.02.2010
ACE-OF-ACES Wrote:RedChico Wrote:Are you an engineer?LOL
Because what you are doing is just stating the obvious, nothing else and you if think you can win the argument by just stating the obvious you are completly wrong.
Unless you present us the reason, the objective of your study, all the calculations, equations, engineering schematics and so on, this is redunctant piece of information.
You really need to read the pdf before you comment
At least once if not twice
Well, just to be sure i reread it again.
There's nothing there but data manipulation, assumptions, some equations of averages and nothing more.
You always talking about errors, about IL2 vs Real.
So what's the point?
You trying to convince who?
- ACE-OF-ACES - 21.02.2010
RedChico Wrote:Well, just to be sure i reread it again.Red if you have any specific questions about something in the report that you think is in error
There's nothing there but data manipulation, assumptions, some equations of averages and nothing more.
You always talking about errors, about IL2 vs Real.
So what's the point?
You trying to convince who?
I am all ears
But if all you want to do is express your opinion over and over
Well good on you
Just don't expect me to follow you tit for tat
PS feel free to PM me if you want to ask a dumb question to save face here in the forum
- RedChico - 21.02.2010
ACE-OF-ACES Wrote:RedChico Wrote:Well, just to be sure i reread it again.Red if you have any specific questions about something in the report that you think is in error
There's nothing there but data manipulation, assumptions, some equations of averages and nothing more.
You always talking about errors, about IL2 vs Real.
So what's the point?
You trying to convince who?
I am all ears
But if all you want to do is express your opinion over and over
Well good on you
Just don't expect me to follow you tit for tat
PS feel free to PM me if you want to ask a dumb question to save face here in the forum
What opinion?
Tell me? Show me where do i express my opinion.
Again what is on your report is a bunch of graphs, using basic Statistical equations comparing Real world data Vs IL2 of 2 diferent planes
- ACE-OF-ACES - 21.02.2010
Red if you have any specific questions about something in the report that you think is in error
I am all ears
But if all you want to do is express your opinion over and over
Just don't expect me to follow you tit for tat
Others have figured it out
Give it some time, maybe read it again
Than if you have any specific questions
Let me know!
Re: REALISM RATING F-51D-30NA by HSFX4.1 - ACE-OF-ACES - 28.02.2010
UPDATE
I replaced the real P-51B with 'calculated' P-51D data
By calculated I mean I adjusted real 67" P-51D to 75" data
I am currently working on the write up that will explane how the data was adjusted, once it is done Ill include the link on page one