![]() |
|
FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#22
|
|||||||
|
|||||||
![]()
Hardly
What I am asking for is the minimum equipment for most if not all FM error claims by the community at large That being, provide.. 1) A track file for review 2) The real world source your using as a reference Quote:
Even though david said (mentioned) on page 8, i.e. Quote:
Quote:
1) Tom noticed a change 2) 50kph (31mph) is too small of a change for most people to notice So.. Who should we belive? Tom or David? Or should we make changes to the FM based off a home coming queen type of vote.. Where we count up the number of people that say they saw no different vs. the people who said they saw a difference and go with the majority? Keeping in mind most people who complain about speed errors don't even know the difference between TAS and IAS Or is there a better way? Personally I think it would be best hat if someone is going to say there is an error with the FM than it is that persons responsibility to provide a minimum amount of proof to support his claim. In the past with IL-2 that min amount of proof consisted of a track file and a link to the real world data they were using as a reference TWO THINGS DAVID DID NOT PROVIDED! Is that too much to ask? I think not, only because I don't want a change on the FM based on some sort of cheer leader home coming queen mentality But that is just me! Your mileage may vary! Quote:
Yes, Theory! I am glad that you agree with me on that much! Quote:
Even though I said on page 8, i.e. Quote:
Now.. Lets see if your man enough to admit you were wrong! LOL! Quote:
Seems you were just projecting when you said that! Nice try Repent, but you have shown your true colors!
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|