Beware the trash can

[Octal450]

@jwocky
This is what I did when the old broken MD-10-10 was put into a much better MD-10-Family package. A link to the newer on in the README, with an explanation.

You are welcome to push to my planes if you want, as says the licence!

@richard
@IAHM-COL
The conflict is both aircrafts are called F15C, so they would conflict. (i think)

Maybe it would be a good idea to rename yours F-15C.

Welcome Richard!

Josh

[SHM]

Welcome Richard

[IAHM-COL]

Point me to the topic on the forum where this has taken place, as I must have missed it.

Kindly

FORUM post
FORUM2 post

[bomber]

You sod !

You know I followed both of those links don't you )

[IAHM-COL]

those links are 100% the correct ones bomber.
No jokes involved. If you are asking for an openly discuss post in the Curtis' forum: it does not exist. Curtis is only interested to talk down people about respects above the law, and beyond.

The truth behind the matters is that this one is just another good example of a very important decision on which they hide behind the list, make a decision in less than a week, implement it, and never even announce the community about it, behing the excuse that this decisions oughta be taken place solely on the devel list.

Ultimately, that is just a mechanism of control-exercision.

And they keep being delusional or deceiving? I don't know.

Let's say: the excuse here is that such trash-can is solely for the purpose to move planes which a newer best replacement exist.
But the first executed plane is the classic example of the contrary:

What is the replacement existing for the sr20?
https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/fgaddon/HEAD/tree/attic/Aircraft/

I don't know of any, and it is the first plane to fall in disgrace, just because someone can know commit its moving =out of the collection.

Yeah, granted, the plane can deal with a lot of TLC, but taking out into a trash can is not going to do the magick

https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/sr20

So, interestingly, that's where it stands.
they created the attic to move planes out, but it will always be somehow of a gray area when a plane desserved the end-of-life.

[IAHM-COL]

also, the sr20 seems to be merely a 3d model without FDM?

FDM creators anyone?


there's a discarded plane we can inherit and protect under our FGMEMBERS wings

Maybe the sr22
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/Cirrus-SR22
Could be a close enough model to take some of the code?

(oh yeah! it's a helijah quality FDM! which is already trash-bin desserving, most likely)

[IAHM-COL]

about the discarded sr20


Oh! wow!
For a model this level of simple, and without an obvious FDM on its source, it actually flies and works within FG reasonably well

I'm flabbergasted!!

[LesterBoffo]

Let's not be too harsh on Emmnauel, he does makes some basic aircraft that can be built upon and improved. And his FDM's are getting marginally better over time. I still find that if I like one of his aircraft enough to tinker, that any changes I make to the initial YAsim file sometimes means there's an entire rebuild as far as engine masses, wing and tail surface root positions. He's also not good at airfoil stall hysteresis and including incidence and washout.

[IAHM-COL]

granted.

^

As lesbof said.

[besides: who am I to talk!?
Everytime I mess with an FDM the modded plane has no way to go but down!! and JWocky comes to my rescue every single time
]

[Richard]

Point me to the topic on the forum where this has taken place, as I must have missed it.

I emailed the original contributors; and discussed with them. I maybe should have posted to the devel-list.

My reasons for suggesting removal was that I wanted to keep the same model name with the new one so that (multi)players with an old flightgear would maybe still see something. I also checked on mpserver12 and watched for the old one on multiplay to get an idea of usage.

When I first came to FlightGear I spent ages going through the aircraft lists to try and find a decent one - maybe this clouded my judgement as I didn't think there was any need to have more than one decent model of any given type. Since then I realise that there are cases where it's impossible to judge which craft should be distributed and thus the only solution is to distribute both.

The exception is when there is a very poor model and a good model then it seems obvious that the poor one should be deprecated by moving to the attic, unless there is a poor 3d model with a good aero package, compared with a model that has a poor aero package and a good 3d model. To me it seems logical that these should be merged - but often this isn't simple to achieve and I understand why.

The other problem is that who gets to judge the models; I think I'm fair and impartial but then I guess everyone thinks that about themselves.

Every aircraft should be considered individually as to its future and nothing that might have a future should be deleted. I didn't think the f15c had a future so I discussed with the developers (that responded) and acted in a way that I believed was appropriate.

If anyone actually wants a copy then I've got a saved version from before it was removed.