73
edits
User talk:HHS: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→MBB_Bo_105: new section
(→ASK21: new section) |
(→MBB_Bo_105: new section) |
||
| Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
LG | LG | ||
D-ECHO | D-ECHO | ||
== MBB_Bo_105 == | |||
If you want to run me down, then I'm sure you can find much better examples than this to work with. Maybe I have offended you somewhere else? Whatever. The quote (extract) does '''NOT''' state that the 45% back cyclic was not "''completly true and realistic''" but (basically for mechanical reasons of a self-centering computer joystick) that it made it a difficult choice for a beginner. My comments are also an excerpt from a longer discussion, the context of which is not made obvious here. | |||
"I believe the Bo105 also had AFCS" is used as an example of one of the "false assumptions about the realism". How does a passing comment on a message board achieve such significance? A mistaken belief (of mine) that could have easily and diplomatically corrected? | |||
The force-trim instructions appear to have been added to the Wiki after my comment (Revision as of 13:52, 6 December 2015). Strange, that. Could have just said something like | |||
''Thanks to Warty for pointing out that the typical 45% back cyclic makes it a difficult choice for a beginner. However, this can be made easier by using what creates a similar effect to the follow up trim system described in the MBB training manual. FGFS comes with a generic AutoTrim-function . . . .'' | |||
And then there's the digs against FGUK (relating to a different aircraft). You seem to be using this Wiki as a platform for a personal vendetta. Is that what it's meant to be for? Hopefully, you will edit the offending page yourself rather than me having to do it for you. | |||
Cheers | |||
[[User:Warty|Warty]] ([[User talk:Warty|talk]]) 05:55, 18 October 2016 (EDT) | |||