Board index FlightGear Development Aircraft

Su-15

Questions and discussion about creating aircraft. Flight dynamics, 3d models, cockpits, systems, animation, textures.

Re: Su-15

Postby swampthing » Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:14 am

Thats a work of art.
www.opredflag.com
I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man. -Thomas Jefferson-
swampthing
 
Posts: 557
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2015 4:10 am
Location: Missouri
Callsign: swamp
Version: 2018.2
OS: multiple

Re: Su-15

Postby Hooray » Fri Dec 11, 2015 11:01 am

vitos wrote:It works already. It's not page at wiki, it's working code. [...] Not one even opened file to look what it can


Like I said previously, it would be a good idea to post a direct link to the corresponding file and get in touch with Red Leader, even if just to send him a heads-up, so that he's aware of your code/efforts. The MP functionality /could/ be useful admittedly - but looking at how you implemented the Radar, it may need quite a bit of work to be reusable elsewhere, i.e. in terms of becoming generic and aircraft/use-case agnostic.

As can be seen by the screenshots on the wiki, the "scripted AI missiles" effort , but also the MapStructure framework, do produce working results/features - it just seems that you are hitting the ceiling of your own capabilities/resources (i.e. spare time), because you are operating in "lone wolf" mode, whereas many others around here may not be as talented as you are when it comes to 3D modeling, texturing or Nasal coding, but they understand how to effectively "collaborate", without any formal "leadership".

Personally, I am unlikely to spend the time looking at the code, given how you responded to my radar related comments - the other issue being that I am only interested in supporting GPL stuff, that is eventually merged upstream, there already is so much "external/dead" stuf (aircraft, features, scripts, code) that is not maintained by the main project, which sooner or later will be irrelevant if it not updated/maintained.

Thus, even if you were 100% right in all that you said, it would be entirely irrelevant 5+ years down the road, because FG will have moved on, and possibly much less capable contributors will have shaped the FlightGear project, because -unlike you- they simply understood how collaboration and contributing can be made to work, despite the constraints of the project and all its deficiencies.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11437
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Su-15

Postby vitos » Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:05 pm

Little update: radioaltimeter low altitude set switch. Just a little warmup before more serious tasks.

Image

As of conversations - when people did shoot missiles at me from these "f-14" and "m-2000" at mp without questions to make it - really ugly behavior - I did not saw any missiles flying. I saw very annoying messages, which these two crafts typed on screen. If You do call that "working over mp" then I could say You are quite wrong. It's not working, it's imitation of working by sending text messages. But as You Yourself do same, I am not surprised You made such mistake.

BTW, when I had converse with guy who maintains that "m-2000" month ago over mp he personally said to me that "m-2000" can not send missile trough mp way that as at my screen - visible to opponent. So some of You two are wrong really, and I suppose it's You.

I will not come to anybody. I do not need that - especially after I made it with "Vostok" and had as result pure knowing that with that community it could bring troubles only. If someone needs part of what I am made, that someone comes to me. And if that one is someone as You - with apologies.

Some people really making impression of ones who somehow did not developed ability to put themselves at places of others.

And about comparison with other models - You can not say, because You did not flew "Su" even once. Maybe You just can't - and that says about model more than enough.
Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Re: Su-15

Postby Thorsten » Sat Dec 12, 2015 7:31 am

Vitos, I'm at a loss why you are here at all.

It seems fairly clear that you'd like to have recognition for your work. Except, by now you're at the stage where you feel you must rub it in everyone's face that your models are so great that really nobody can measure up and that the FG community is too stupid to recognize that.

Except they really aren't the breakthrough transformative input to FG - they're nice, detailed models - no more, no less.

See, there are people who have actually transformed FG. Andy Ross introduced Nasal to it - think of how that changed the game for everyone, how suddenly much richer interactions became possible, from interactive AI scenarios to adaptive menus to custom-scripted systems.

Mathias Froehlich and Tim Moore moved FG to OSG, giving us the effect and shader framework - suddenly opening up the door to create compelling visuals all over the place, making it literally look different for both developers and users all over the place.

You have created three models. You have figured out a way to use Nasal to compute limit checks, but people have done it before and afterwards without ever using your particular implementation. You have figured out how to use JSBSim to do rocket stages, but it's just an 'if'-statement. I didn't even need to look into Vostok to see how to do it for the Shuttle, just the JSBSim manual was enough. You haven't actually done anything of lasting impact for FG - you haven't even created the models everyone wants to aspire to, the models from which everyone copies the effects or systems because he wants to reach the same level of quality.

It's not just me - you don't see many screenshots of your planes around. You don't see other people recommending to look into the systems you have created to see how it should be done. It's the Seattle 777, the new C-172p, the F-14b and the 707 people point to these days.

Maybe everyone else is stupid and you're the only one who understands how good your work is. Or maybe there are other reasons. Maybe it's that you really don't understand rendering, whereas I do to some degree, and maybe you just get some things wrong. Maybe you just don't understand Nasal design as well as Hooray does and get things wrong there as well. Your lone wolf mode, combined with your inability to listen to others in their area of expertise, means that you don't produce anything I'd recommend to others - it works, but it doesn't generalize. And thus it affects FG only marginally.

Now you choose to insult people. You taunt them that they can't fly your plane (as if that'd be an achievement if you don't provide a documentation). Do you really think that will get you the recognition for your work?

If someone needs part of what I am made, that someone comes to me.


I think that's just what galls you most - really nobody seems to need anything of what you made.

When I started out with the Shuttle, I didn't even consider whether I should ask you to team up with me for spaceflight. Why? Because you have made it abundantly clear that you won't listen to anything I say - no matter how well I understand something, and no matter how much it's clear that what you say is not based on knowledge of FG internal.

You could contribute much to FG, and you sure would be respected for these contributions. But you'd have to listen to people now and then when they know better. As Hooray said, you'd need to understand how to collaborate.

Anyway - here's my invitation to end pointless discussions: Stop talking down on other people's work, present your own and be happy with it - and you'll get to enjoy people liking your screenshots. Bad mouthing the rest of the project won't get you what you want.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11327
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Su-15

Postby Thorsten » Sat Dec 12, 2015 7:46 am

I did not saw any missiles flying.


Nor will anyone who hasn't installed your plane see your missles flying (or in fact see your plane at all) - or how do you think he gets the 3d model? Magic?
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11327
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Su-15

Postby vitos » Sat Dec 12, 2015 8:56 am

I think that if someone really made that at level of model which included in short list, and years ago, then protocol would be included in FG at level of Your stuff with nasal "Earth" model and anyone could see that.

And You did not answered about flying my model.

Who put words "sophisticated, professional, open source" on main page? Me?

After all, I can just open source of "f-14", installed with latest stable release data, and not find coordinates of missile sent trough mp there. As anybody else.

Don't lie.
Waste of time: too unprofitable for work, too exhausting for hobby.
User avatar
vitos
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 8:10 pm
Location: Moscow, Russia
Callsign: vitos
IRC name: vitos
Version: 3.4
OS: Debian

Re: Su-15

Postby stuart » Sat Dec 12, 2015 9:57 am

Hi All,

I'm locking this topic as it has degenerated into an argument.

-Stuart (the mod)
G-MWLX
User avatar
stuart
Moderator
 
Posts: 1469
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:56 am
Location: Edinburgh
Callsign: G-MWLX

Previous

Return to Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AhrefsBot [Bot] and 3 guests