Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:16 pm
What a pain the FlightGear EC130 is to start?
I mean even the tutorial is completely wrong..
I mean even the tutorial is completely wrong..
Free Flight, Free Speech
An independent forum for FlightGear users and developers
https://thejabberwocky.net/
Did I ever mention...?
Page 1 of 2
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:57 pm
Yes, but what is CELEBRATING OVER 18 RENT FREE YEARS IN YOUR HEAD supposed to mean?
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 1:26 am
It means no soup for you pilgrim...
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 1:26 pm
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 5:17 pm
So I take it you're not all that interested in talking about flying.
M'Kay..
M'Kay..
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 5:24 pm
I dont recall problems starting the C310.
I'll need to take a look when I have a min.
I'll need to take a look when I have a min.
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 6:15 pm
No, the EC-130 helicopter.. http://wiki.flightgear.org/Eurocopter_EC130_B4
The menu accessible tutorial doesn't even mention the all important interlocked start switch, not to mention that Heiko designed the start system to require you to have over 15 successful starts and flights before you can use the Autostart.
Which should have been optional.
Sort of makes this helicopter not very novice friendly, and I feel this kind of programming actually hurts FlightGear in the long run. Because the EC-130 was a long time staple of the base aircraft install of the Windows .exe download, I think up to FG 2.12. Why would anyone bother with a helicopter that requires deeper research just to make function in the sim.
The menu accessible tutorial doesn't even mention the all important interlocked start switch, not to mention that Heiko designed the start system to require you to have over 15 successful starts and flights before you can use the Autostart.
Which should have been optional.
Sort of makes this helicopter not very novice friendly, and I feel this kind of programming actually hurts FlightGear in the long run. Because the EC-130 was a long time staple of the base aircraft install of the Windows .exe download, I think up to FG 2.12. Why would anyone bother with a helicopter that requires deeper research just to make function in the sim.
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 8:42 pm
Oh Ok
I never jump in that cockpit.
The Sikorsky s76C is the hardest heli I've tried. I can barely prevent it to just spin to dead.
I feel there are two currents of thought here.
The make-it-real proponents suggest that autostart is a cartoonish style of simulation. Think starting the tu154b
The make-it-easy proponents suggest that autostart should be available to get it going
I can't tell who's right. really.
I mean, they both right in their ways. Wrong in the same ones.
Think on the c172p as a nice compromise of an aircraft on which the "autostart" does what is suppose to. An automatic preparation of the plane to just go. While the aircraft operation, at the same time, can be performed to the "real deal".
I think, these sort of compromises lead to the win-win posture. (I mean, in the "lets' get real" realm the }}s keystroke to put the rotatories to spin is quite "a simulation")
No long ago someone proposed changes on the mustang p51d to allow the autostart to just work. This aircraft have been beautifully coded to get a great tutorial, clear menus to get the thing going "real-deal". But for some reason I can't get the engine to spark. Whereas the autostart button just gets us going. Quite an interesting case scenerio:
The autostartable mustang is not available but on FGMEMBERS
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/p51d
Just food for thought.
I never jump in that cockpit.
The Sikorsky s76C is the hardest heli I've tried. I can barely prevent it to just spin to dead.
I feel there are two currents of thought here.
The make-it-real proponents suggest that autostart is a cartoonish style of simulation. Think starting the tu154b
The make-it-easy proponents suggest that autostart should be available to get it going
I can't tell who's right. really.
I mean, they both right in their ways. Wrong in the same ones.
Think on the c172p as a nice compromise of an aircraft on which the "autostart" does what is suppose to. An automatic preparation of the plane to just go. While the aircraft operation, at the same time, can be performed to the "real deal".
I think, these sort of compromises lead to the win-win posture. (I mean, in the "lets' get real" realm the }}s keystroke to put the rotatories to spin is quite "a simulation")
No long ago someone proposed changes on the mustang p51d to allow the autostart to just work. This aircraft have been beautifully coded to get a great tutorial, clear menus to get the thing going "real-deal". But for some reason I can't get the engine to spark. Whereas the autostart button just gets us going. Quite an interesting case scenerio:
The autostartable mustang is not available but on FGMEMBERS
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/p51d
Just food for thought.
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:12 pm
..Say that you are a FG n00b, just downloaded a few of your favorite aircraft, and the EC-130 is one of the ones you really want to try. You fired up the sim, and you encounter the confusing tutorial, which when followed correctly, leaves you with a non running helicopter.
At least having an autostart sequence as an option you can do something. Maybe buried a little bit into the preflight checks menu, I don't know, just to make it a slight challenge? But the thought of having to search online, ( As I had to do this just yesterday..) not dawning on most general users, that you *have* to search FG forum posts about the tute omission causing start problems with the EC-130.
I mean look up 'Starting the EC-130' in Google for FlightGear.
There''s a lot of posts about it, and as I recall Heiko was sort of ambivalent about trying to remedy this.
Would this qualify as a paper-cut bug?
At least having an autostart sequence as an option you can do something. Maybe buried a little bit into the preflight checks menu, I don't know, just to make it a slight challenge? But the thought of having to search online, ( As I had to do this just yesterday..) not dawning on most general users, that you *have* to search FG forum posts about the tute omission causing start problems with the EC-130.
I mean look up 'Starting the EC-130' in Google for FlightGear.
There''s a lot of posts about it, and as I recall Heiko was sort of ambivalent about trying to remedy this.
Would this qualify as a paper-cut bug?
Re: Did I ever mention...?
Posted: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:22 pm
I won't call it a paper-cut bug. But definitely a bug.
I think start up procedure tutorials should be clear, and easy to follow. Explanatory and to the point. think 707, c172p and p51d. Not confusing or mis-leading.
Also autostart is good to be there, and it should do what intended. No more no less. But that's my viewpoint on this.
Fixing the EC130 to have proper starting tutorial that is possible to follow is definitely an issue deserving attention. But again.. I've never been in that cockpit, so I take your word for it.
I think start up procedure tutorials should be clear, and easy to follow. Explanatory and to the point. think 707, c172p and p51d. Not confusing or mis-leading.
Also autostart is good to be there, and it should do what intended. No more no less. But that's my viewpoint on this.
Fixing the EC130 to have proper starting tutorial that is possible to follow is definitely an issue deserving attention. But again.. I've never been in that cockpit, so I take your word for it.