884
edits
User talk:HHS: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
Formatting to the style we all agreed here
No edit summary |
m (Formatting to the style we all agreed here) |
||
| Line 150: | Line 150: | ||
:--[[User:HHS|HHS]] ([[User talk:HHS|talk]]) 11:44, 18 October 2016 (EDT) | :--[[User:HHS|HHS]] ([[User talk:HHS|talk]]) 11:44, 18 October 2016 (EDT) | ||
::"''The 5% of the FGUK Version's EC145 is unrealistic btw. This helicopter (EC145 is just a maketing name. The real name is BK117 C2) has the same, but scaled, rotor head and rigging like the BO105. So it should have the same 45% back cyclic like the BO105. According to to Walter Bittners "Flugmechanik der Hubschrauber" this is the case. Depending on CoG, loads, and flight states the position of the cyclic will vary a lot anyway, so a 0% cyclic at lift-off would make problems on other flight states like fast cruise.''" | ::"''The 5% of the FGUK Version's EC145 is unrealistic btw. This helicopter (EC145 is just a maketing name. The real name is BK117 C2) has the same, but scaled, rotor head and rigging like the BO105. So it should have the same 45% back cyclic like the BO105. According to to Walter Bittners "Flugmechanik der Hubschrauber" this is the case. Depending on CoG, loads, and flight states the position of the cyclic will vary a lot anyway, so a 0% cyclic at lift-off would make problems on other flight states like fast cruise.''" | ||
what has that got to do with the Bo105?? | ::what has that got to do with the Bo105?? | ||
"''Since you seems to represent FGUK here''" - No, no, no, no! I absolutely do '''NOT''' represent FGUK here. I won't comment any more on your thoughts about FGUK. | ::"''Since you seems to represent FGUK here''" - No, no, no, no! I absolutely do '''NOT''' represent FGUK here. I won't comment any more on your thoughts about FGUK. | ||
You used me as a source without first checking/confirming that my comments were a valid source for your argument. It was just something to hang your argument on - cherry picking. I know this is not Wikipedia but it's still shoddy editing. I don't need your approval to make changes so I'm hoping that you will do the decent thing and make the changes so that I don't need to. | ::You used me as a source without first checking/confirming that my comments were a valid source for your argument. | ||
::It was just something to hang your argument on - cherry picking. I know this is not Wikipedia but it's still shoddy editing. I don't need your approval to make changes so I'm hoping that you will do the decent thing and make the changes so that I don't need to. | |||
Cheers, | ::Cheers, | ||
[[User:Warty|Warty]] ([[User talk:Warty|talk]]) 13:19, 18 October 2016 (EDT) | ::[[User:Warty|Warty]] ([[User talk:Warty|talk]]) 13:19, 18 October 2016 (EDT) | ||