Personally I can see Oleg and Co having an issue using another sim as 'reference' model. (Though the screen shots are a lot clearer than a scannned 70 yr old photo)

Bobc, In other threads you've stated that you've done primary archaeological research on BoB crash sites. Any chance of any links to photo's that highlight the differences?

One of ther things that gets me is that 70yrs ago they were more interested in a dramatic photo of the pilots and outside of the plane, but something like an instrument pannel was so so common place nobody would waste film on!


Cheers!

@BOBC

Isn't that pic just a MkII? If it's so wrong as a MKI what feature makes you think it's a MKI?

http://img46.imageshack.us/img46/8411/jujuh.jpg

Sorry, couldn't resist ;).

Seriously though, I think I support your crusade.

Lol!

ROFL, good post :)

I think people should relax, and remember that, if you are on a budget, and you have to choose to release the game with a faulty (minorly, to a non-historican) spitfire, or fix it, and perhaps leave something else unfinished, you are indeed wasting time even thinking about that decision. And time, my friends, is money!

Give the guys a break, maybe he will re-do the cockpit for a spit. I and use the existing one for the correct model! And hey! we have more spitfires!!

MOAR SPITFIARS!

..it's interesting how these rivet counting nazis always come out at the last stage of development.. it must be Murphy's Law applied to simulators..

OBCD (is it like OCD? ;) ), this might come as a shock to you, but the overall purpose of a sim is to simulate the whole action of a flight battle, not to be a reference bible.. the developers worked to the best of their capabilities, and I'm sure that if they reckon your flaws are worth their time, they'll do something about it, otherwise it will end up in the "FW190 bar" filing cabinet (the vets here know what I'm talking about..).

Now don't get me wrong, I don't think that what you're saying is incorrect, but the "life or death" way you're presenting it is quite comical.. as someone else more kindly suggested before, go get a life, but with a smile ;)

You missed the gauge with the wrong Font, should have been RAF Sans, and not DH Roman.






;)
runs.....

I seem to have to spend all my time untwisting things posters are saying or re-iterating my simple mission. Please read my posts carefully and post on what I have to say, not let other postings become my own words.


The lengthy thread is in fact other posters arguing the need for/against a fix, I just come in to refocus on the original simple observation and correct posters twisting of what I have said. My replies are now getting long through having to quote others then correct things ! For example :-

case in point !!!! I reply with my own quote, I did say...
Quite right, I did initially assume, understandably, that the shots were from their Battle of Britain Spitfire cockpit, given the theme of the sim, and as such would be the Mk1, as very few Mk 2’s flew at that time by comparison to the number of Mk1’s. To give allowance for the fact that they may be only, note the word ONLY, showing us a Mk2, I now say in my text, if this is supposed to be a Mk1, then these are the areas that need correcting sometime if they wish to correct them. I am not demanding they do, some posters are, I am personally wishing they do, but I leave the decision to Oleg and team. I have offered full supporting evidence via email should they wish to consider.

If it’s a Mk2 why hasn’t a member of the team pointed such out by now ? Whilst we cant expect them to have time to engage in many posts on forums one short reply could have saved some work.

There are no features there that say Mk1, that’s the trouble, I see this cockpit in videos from the sim which show a Mk1 on the outside. I also had assumed that stills of the cockpit would be of the Mark associated with the Battle of Britain. Why not show us the Mk1. I see this and nothing else, no variations.

Good question.
The following would still need correcting, referring to the Spit Mk2 Pilots Notes :-
Trim wheel
Rudder pedals
Landing lamp switch and controls (in the photo and wreckage seen but switch not on the Mk2 manuf drg of the panel)
Dual fuel cocks
Clock
Magneto Switches
Natural metal heads to main panel fasteners
Cream coloured cables for gunsight electrics. (Baron note, nothing to do with length, but appearance)
Amps gauge (in photo but not on manuf drg)
Starter buttons, (Mk1 and 2 only had one, sim has two)
Red glowing lamp still needs deleting.
Addition of Cartridge Starting reloading control where red lamp is.
Oxygen concertina hose on stbd wall remove, not shown in my photo as not visible but I have seen this in footage or a still from the sim, there may be other features also we have yet to see. The hose is MkV so needs removing from Mk1 and 2.
This is a list of ‘everything’ that would need changing, if Oleg wanted to do so, inc cosmetics like all the shiny fastener heads, may seem petty, there are over 65 of these shining at us. So many and their size have in fact a great visual impact on the panels appearance and must be added to get the Mk1 cockpit looking so different to later cockpits. See the dvd Spitfire Frontline Fighter IWM series for the Mk1 cockpit footage.


As others have pointed out, and as I saw a reason for a simple observation, they claim for very accurate well researched cockpits. You are in fact finding fault with their goal. I was simply assisting them with it. There have been a number of posts saying its just a sim, who cares about the cockpits, in other words the Maddox team shouldn’t be caring either or making such claims.

Thank you, I think,... I say ‘I think’ as I am not so sure !… given the LARGE text before that:-

Is so denigrating and opposite of my simple mission to assist their apparent goal that I just don’t see how you could come up with that then give support. Sorry but I don’t quite get the sense of humour if that was it. Please remove one or the other to clarify your case and better show the support which I am grateful for. The support is lost with the visual impact of the wording before it which borders on hurtful. I didn’t do this to get insulted.
I simply wish for understanding of the fact that I have accurate data to offer, take it or leave it basis. How my simple quest to point out what would need changing to represent a Mk1 cockpit, if they are showing us a Mk1 cockpit, could be seen as having a superiority complex, beats me. Some of the posts in this thread should scare off anyone else who may have what they think is a worthy observation to make ! Flying Pencil...Picking fault with a font, come on….its this exaggeration again and again. Someone says the wing shouldn’t have stiffening strakes over it, posters reply, I don’t care if the strakes are 0.5 inch out of place,..its not what the poster is on about, but denegrate it by making out the poster is being picky with such a minor thing that people wouldn’t notice. The stiffening strakes were by the way removed so Oleg and team did care. I keep gatting mention of one gauge or a font..come on guys, play the game.


Cheers. I hope I dont have to spend even more time correcting un-truths..I just dont have time for such ....Certainly not getting my hopes up, but mention of Olegs track record of correcting with updates I hope for those here wishing to see the fixes, comes true.

BOBC

BOBC, I can understand why it bothers you. Most folks here would have a fit if they saw a Rolls Royce engined Buchon in the game instead of proper 109's. I know a bit about WWII aircraft but not to the detail level that you do. Because I don't know, it does not bother me. I hope the developement team reads this and corrects it later on.

Well BOBC, personally I think you've been very polite and reasonable in your request. The facts you offer are well presented and researched. Developers need guys like you. Shame they didn't take up your offer when you made it.