bkthunder

I'm pretty upset about the F-15E being licensed to Razbam. They can't complete a high-fidelity Harrier, how can ED trust them to make a complex, multi-crew aicraft such as the F-15E? Another great and iconic airframe going to waste. ED or maybe HB should take care of these, with demonstrated competence in place of workarounds and gross errors in system modeling.

I'm a little baffled to see an ED official state that wind direction and speed affects the trimming of the aircraft. It's basic pilot knowledge that wind has absolutely 0 aerodynamic effect on a flying aircraft, so if wind really is a factor in this case, then something is fundamnetally wrong with the FM.

Was flying yesterday on the Korea MP server, and this bug made it literally impossible to join the fight because on the route to the AO the sun was exactly at my 6 and at the right angle to make that area of the dashboard blindingly white. A fix for something so simple would be nice after 2 years....

Thanks, however most of the reported bugs are not on the bug tracker. And it anyway doesn't answer why they were moved to the resolved bugs section. So far it looks like they were simply dismissed, they are not in the bug tracker and they are hidden in the resolved bugs section...what should we think?

Isn't the thrust reverser overpowered? From a standstill, engaging it and going full throttle results in a near-instant acceleration that is quicker than the forward acceleration during takeoff with after-burner. Is this a workaround to some DCS limitation?

There ARE dozens ;) https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=226258 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220381 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220868 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=244702&page=2 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=211239&page=3 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=196933&page=7 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=217140&page=3 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=198999 etc.

Can you define what "a blast" mean? That's very subjective. Is it a blast because you have fun regardless of the bugs? Is it a blast because you don't care about systems working in the wrong way and you just like it as long as you can drop bombs in whatever way? The OP is deciding between the A-10C and the Harrier, so what exactly makes the harrier "a blast" compared to the fully functional and nearly 100% accurate A-10C? Fun and accuracy/completeness are two entirely different things. Fun is subjective, completeness and accuracy are objective. Offer some obective facts about the Harrier, and let the poor guy decide for himself if it's "a blast" for him, or not.

Really simple question to a puzzling behavior: why are non resolved bugs being moved to the resolved bugs section? I mean, is it a mistake or do you just try to pretend they are resolved?

With all the "this is not a franken-viper" advertising they made, turns out this is more franken than any other simulated F-16 out there...

Yeah that's true! Nice find!

1 year and 2 months later... do you still feel so positive?

Exactly, they are out of their depth and unfortunately the F-15E will get stuck in Razbamness forever. I don't know on what basis ED grants licenses, but handing off such a complex and important airframe as the Strike Eagle to a 3rd party that has a proven track record of NOT being able to deliver accuracy and high quality is short sighted. ED should have kept it for themselves given the experience they have/will have with multirole fighters. As for how good or bad the Harrier is, well, I am a DCS user because I like to simulate flying airplanes to which I don't have access to IRL. To me that means reading the manual, learning the procedures, employ weapons in a realistic way and using realistic procedures as much as possible within the realm of a desktop sim. The fact I can start-up and operate the F-14, F-18, F-5 etc. using the checklist I find in the Natops or -1 manuals is a testament to what DCS stands for: maximum realism and accuracy. Of course not everything can be 100% correct, and there are bugs and missing features here and there in other modules as well, but in general things are implemented in great detail and accuracy, which is NOT the case for most things in the Harrier. So yes, we complain and I tell you exactly why. On the prouct page it says "Highly realistic modelling of the aircraft systems including electrical, fuel, hydraulics, lighting, engine and navigation" and "Advanced Flight Model that provides realistic performance and flight characteristics of a Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) aircraft" Have a look at the Natops and tell me in good faith that it does what it says on the tin...

Fully agree.

Here, just a few posts to refresh your memory. Of course they were moved to the "resolved bugs" section even though not a single thing has been fixed/corrected/implemented. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220868 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=203105 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220911 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=202578 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=248457 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=222417 Etc.

BUMP!

BUMP: NOT FIXED!

So should I re-write the whole list of bugs and missing features at each post mentioning them? I don't think so. Go and check the bug section, you'll find what you're looking for. Alternatively, I suggest you take the NATOPS and try to follow even just the start-up checklist, there you'll just start to see how many things are not simulated correctly. Or you could read up on the particular flight carachteristics of the Harrier, especially when hovering, none of which are simulated in the razbam harrier.

It's great in VR!

Thank you and Merry Xmas! Another year gone... Despite missing / WIP features, DCS has given me hours and hours of fun. Looking at it from a distance, 2.5 is the best and most stable version of DCS we've ever had. Best wishes to ED and thank you :santa:

I am afraid their definition of "finished" might differ from yours... :music_whistling:

Razbam doesn't really care about accuracy as much as a DCS-level developer should IMO. They are happy with stuff that looks ok and works in a similar fashion to how the RL couterpart does, but they seem to have no interest or skills to replicate how things actually work (not referring to classified systems here). I gave up on the Harrier unfortunately, due to the numerous bugs and especially because things are just "simulated" in the wrong way. A bug is a program error or mistake, but here we have things that are just coded wrong because the devs themselves don't understand hwo they actually work. Sorry but I can't trust them with anymore complex airframes such as the F-15E. This, as much as the Harrier, deserve a better representation than what Razbam can do.

IMO, the range of movement is correct, but the way the flex builds up is unnutural. If you look at the videos, the tip launchers feel more "springy", while in DCS the wingtip launchers point up or down in a very linear fashion, as it they were moved by a linear actuator. Hard to explain, I hope you understand what I mean.

A lot of this boils down to how realistically (or unrealistically) people in MP servers fly. Most of the F-14s flown on dogfight servers for example are over-g, but who cares, it's only one round. A lot of people exploit the fact you can pull crazy alpha in the F-14 for a split second and shoot, again, pulling up to 10g in the process. Others fly flaps down and overspeed the flaps etc. So IMO, yes, the F-14 can out-turn an F-16 (without over-g), but IRL no pilot would fly as recklessly as we do here, so flying at the edge of the envelope in an F-14 is a lot more difficult and risky that in a FBW F-16 where you just pull without the risk of breaking anything. Imagine that a split second can make a difference in a dogfight, if the F-16 pilot only has to pull back on the stick to "instantly" achieve a perfect turn, the F-14 pilot has to build up g more gradually, he cannot just slam it back.

Wow, didn't know that much stuff was not accurate in the F-18 radar. Thanks for the in-depth explanation and hopefully the devs can chime in on this list!

Geometry from the RAT housing clips inside the air intake