Board index FlightGear Support Flying

Rating system

Controlling your aircraft, using the autopilot etc.

Rating system

Postby dilbert » Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:05 am

Perhaps I'm mistaken (often the case), but the current four level system gives the impression it's based on a level of rating in any individual category.

Under such a system, a plane rated with four threes for a total score of twelve would have preference to one with three fours and one two for a total score of fourteen; which to me is nonsensical.

To me, a sixteen level system based on total score would make more sense, irrespective of which of the sixteen was selected to limit the number of planes in the default add-on hangar.

Kind Regards
dilbert
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:36 pm
Location: KBFM, Alabama, USA
Callsign: db1
Version: 2019.1.2
OS: WIN 10 Ubuntu64

Re: Rating system

Postby Thorsten » Tue Nov 05, 2019 8:13 am

Sorry - what is your point?

If you have a splendid FDM and systems simulation and a high-quality exterior model but no cockpit at all, you score 15 points in total - but would you really prefer that over a plane with good FDM (4) and systems (4), decent cockpit (3) and simple exterior model (2) - with 13 points in total?

I would think that in terms of immersion something's really missing in the first case - I like to see cockpits - asking for a balance in quality does not seem nonsense to me.

but the current four level system gives the impression it's based on a level of rating in any individual category.


I'm guessing it gives the impression because it is based on a level of rating in any individual category.

***

And - what is this post doing under Support/Flying???
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11374
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Rating system

Postby dilbert » Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:27 pm

Thanks Thorsten for the reply

Not sure I follow. If you have four in three categories and 0 in one, it adds up to twelve, not fifteen.

Statistically speaking, the present system favors complexity over quality.
dilbert
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:36 pm
Location: KBFM, Alabama, USA
Callsign: db1
Version: 2019.1.2
OS: WIN 10 Ubuntu64

Re: Rating system

Postby Thorsten » Tue Nov 05, 2019 3:44 pm

Not sure I follow. If you have four in three categories and 0 in one, it adds up to twelve, not fifteen.


Yes, but if you have five (which is the maximum you can set) in three it adds to fifteen- it's no big mystery. :mrgreen:

Statistically speaking, the present system favors complexity over quality.


Define 'quality' please - and explain how it is not related to complexity.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11374
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Rating system

Postby dilbert » Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:14 pm

Guess I never noticed a plane with five-my bad.

Nevertheless, the same statistical relationship applies, regardless of whether you have five categories or four. There are abundant planes of excellent quality that may lack a high rating in one particular category. Quality of a model certainly would include a well executed cockpit, excellent flight dynamics, and the like. However, planes lacking a high rating for "systems" may be ones that have absolutely no need of same, but which, nevertheless, get a poor mark in that particular category.

For a good example, I suggest you compare the DH-2, which is excluded from the FG-Addon default listing (because of its 2 rating in systems) and the DH-6, which is included. Think the comparison will make my point pretty clear.
dilbert
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:36 pm
Location: KBFM, Alabama, USA
Callsign: db1
Version: 2019.1.2
OS: WIN 10 Ubuntu64

Re: Rating system

Postby bugman » Tue Nov 05, 2019 4:33 pm

Neither the old website for downloading aircraft nor the launcher sum the ratings values. Therefore there is no aircraft preference ever presented to the user based on this concept. Instead what you have is a filter whereby the user sets the minimum rating values for each category - FDM, systems, cockpit, model - individually based on their personal preferences. I personally prefer the FDM over all else - I even use the UIUC FDMs with no 3D model, no systems, and no cockpit hidden deep in FGData that no users ever know about ;) But others prefer cockpits and systems. While others prefer perfect 3D models. Hence the filter where you can set the minimum values for each category to highlight your 'best' aircraft is a system that works for all.

Regards,
Edward
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1733
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: Rating system

Postby dilbert » Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:09 pm

Thanks, Bugman. That's exactly how I, as a somewhat experienced user operate as well. If what you say is so, how then are the planes selected for the default FG-Addon list in the first place?

The DR-400 (which is included) has only four categories of rating, as is also the case with other of planes I've checked: FDM, Cockpit, Systems, and model .

The fact that the DR 400 is included with a total score of 11 and the DH-2 excluded with a total score of 13 confirms your comment that the system does not sum the rating numbers.

While inclusion in the default Add-on list may be irrelevant to an experienced user, it is of consequence to a brand new member sampling airplanes. And a likely conclusion for her/him might well be that planes excluded are of lesser value.

Thanks for the reply and kind regards.
dilbert
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:36 pm
Location: KBFM, Alabama, USA
Callsign: db1
Version: 2019.1.2
OS: WIN 10 Ubuntu64

Re: Rating system

Postby Thorsten » Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:17 pm

For a good example, I suggest you compare the DH-2, which is excluded from the FG-Addon default listing (because of its 2 rating in systems) and the DH-6, which is included. Think the comparison will make my point pretty clear.


Leaving aside the question whether the DHC-2 is correctly rated in systems, the difference says that the DHC-2 has

* no accurate startup procedure
* no generic failure modeling
* no ability to follow the real standard checklists in their entirety
* no ability to simulate emergency procedures

I'm quite familiar with the DHC-6 and can vouch that it has quite a detailed startup checklist and quite a bit of failure modeling implemented and that there's plenty of checklists available for its operation, so I see the rating of 4 for systems on the DHC-6 rather justified.

I'd guess that the DHC-2 lacks the higher rating because it doesn't really do failure modeling of any sort (?), but I'm not familiar enough to really comment on details. It does seem to deserve a lower rating than the DHC-6 though, whether this really should be a 2 or a 3 I can't say without more details.

I would also like to point out that for a comparatively simple aircraft, creating a 'complete' simulation of systems (leading to a 5) is about a hundred times less involved than even reaching a 3 in a craft as complex as the e.g. Space Shuttle (when the 3 asks for 'no unrealistic systems'). So the rating is not based on 'how many systems in total did you simulate' (if that were the case, the Shuttle would require a rating of 50 or so), the question is 'what fraction of all really existing systems and procedures is supported'.

So it would seem that the DHC-2 is perhaps close to getting a 3 rating, but not quite there.

The short version - I completely fail to see the point you're trying to make, and I assure you there's no such thing as a 'default listing' which excludes anything on FGAddon from distribution.

regardless of whether you have five categories or four.


Kindly read what is written - there's four categories that can be rated with up to five points each - not five categories.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11374
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Rating system

Postby dilbert » Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:29 pm

Thanks, Thorsten.

Really appreciate the detailed explanation of how the individual category ratings are determined.

Apologize for the bother. Appreciate your having far more important matters to deal with.

Best Regards
dilbert
 
Posts: 525
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:36 pm
Location: KBFM, Alabama, USA
Callsign: db1
Version: 2019.1.2
OS: WIN 10 Ubuntu64

Re: Rating system

Postby Thorsten » Tue Nov 05, 2019 5:40 pm

It occurs to me you probably are not aware of the wiki article:

http://wiki.flightgear.org/Aircraft_rating_system
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11374
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Rating system

Postby wkitty42 » Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:26 pm

one might also look at the default qualification settings in the launcher for the aircraft tab ;) that should be enough to explain why some craft are shown and others now... i forget what they were as i turn off the qualifications so i see all craft no matter what...
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 5984
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5


Return to Flying

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot [Bot] and 1 guest