Neil Gardner

I’m sorry, I don’t mean to be adversarial but no commercial organisation knows what’s coming around the corner. They don’t exist for you and I, they exist to compete in a market for money, one that may or may not grace them with its favour. Tomorrow the proverbial might hit the fan and it could be 2007 or 1923 again and then our little worries about whether or not there will be a little digital model of an F15 working in a months time will have become a little besides the point. To state the obvious we really do, sometimes, need to remind ourselves that anyone in one of the world’s numerous war zones at the moment may take quite a dim view of the worries thar exercise you and I. So, the answer is count as a plus what you have today and enjoy it whilst you have it because tomorrow you, me and everything else might have been reduced to a load of dust in a fall out cloud - not be too over dramatic am I?

I just read a statement thar appeared on Facebook. Didn’t know whether it was official or not, or contemporary. I have a strong dislike for Facebook, don’t go on there a great deal and consequently saw a notice that seemed official saying that talks had broken down and that was that, but then lost it and can’t find it anymore, As I day, I’ve no idea whether it is worth taking seriously, wondered if anyone can through any light on it.

Forgive me, but is there not a margin of error in real life? I often miss but frequently have to put that down to my somewhat dismal flying and aiming at tge same time. I remember at the time of the first gulf war we were told that American bombers could post a bomb through a letter box, but that wasn’t entirely true.

I think I largely agree you there. I was a little confused by the notion that ED does not have the code for the four modules provided by RB.. I thought the code all came from ED’s SDK, which you have to use in order to supply models for DCS. Of course what they do not have ownership of is the work already done so far, but I thought I remembered - bear in mind that this is many years ago so it could just be an old codgers ghost memory - but in the discussions after the Hawk it was decided to include a contractual stipulation that if a developer pulls our, ED have first refusal on the modules. Again, it could be false memory syndrome, like when I thought Wales had a world class rugby union team - now it is but a hazy dream..

Thank you.

I wonder why that is ? I would not think it would be injurious to anyone’s case to stare one way or another. It is thr only concern I personally have about the whole dispute.

I just have one question really. Can anyone tell me definitively and with evidence that if RB departs then their modules will or will not be supported. What I mean by ‘supported’ is not just made compatible for a short period, but maintained and developed into the foreseeable future. . People have already made reference to the Hawk which was exactly not the way I think most of us will want things to go. Can I ask, please, if it might be possible that someone from the company supply a firm unequivocal response to that question. I’m sorry if that question has already been answered but I’ve not quite found it. Thank you. Neil

Hello all, Those of us that have been following the development of this wonderful simulator from the beginning will remember that once there was a company called VEO? (Sorry, can’t quite remember), and they developed a Hawk for DCS. It was an excellent model though it needed a bit of update work done and after a while it fell behind. Unfortunately the company pulled out of the project, I believe it was financial issues, and the way things were then DCS could not take the project over. I would like to make a plea for someone to develop this aircraft again. It is, for we Brits, something of an iconic machine, being that aircraft that has now trained several generations of RAF and FAA fighter pilots, and has been the aircraft of choice for the superb Red arrows, some of whom actually had a go of the virtual aeroplane and enjoyed it a great deal, commenting on its accuracy, and even complementing the sim pilots because in many ways it’s harder to fly the sim perfectly than it is to fly the real thing - I’m sure that is not the case but it was nice of them to say - if we make a bad mistake all we have to do is cuss and go into the living room to grumpily watch some rubbish TV; if they make a mistake people can die. Anyway, I again would like to make the plea that someone take a hold of a project to build the Hawk for DCS. The Just Flight model, just updated for FS2024, is beautiful but of course like all the FS military aircraft it is very limited in its ability to render weapons. So, please, please, please, let’s hear it for the Hawk all you clever people that know how to build these things, and produce a new one for we addicts.. Thanks all. Neil.

Feeling a bit foolish now. Thanks for that, you were right

Absolutely.

Hi Thanks for replying. What do you mean by 'take them out of the start position;? Its certainly in cold and dark that I get the problem. If I am already flying, say in instant action, then they work because already out of C and D. But when in C and D, well nothing seems to shift them anymore.

I will just say that I now see where RafaPolit’s concerns come from, and to be fair he has significant justification for them.

Excuse me asking, but how do you known that ED has withheld payment from other developers? I must confess I was nit aware of this because I have no first hand experience of ED’s business practices, but tha5 doesn’t make you wrong. I am ignorant of many things.Do you mind sharing your source? Thank you.

I am a vicar and so you might have known I would say this, but I echo the sentiment , ‘be nice to one another’. It’s a small ask but it facilitates much better discussion. Also, if you don’t know what people are thinking or planning to do, and for the most part you don’t, then always give them the benefit of the doubt. Imagine that the best of motives are in operation not the worst, be charitable and slow to attribute nefarious intentions to anyone. Most people only try their best, even if often they get it wrong, like I do. I suppose knowing what a twat I am makes me an advocate this disposition because if I was ever subject to critical scrutiny I wouldn’t come out too well. I echo a second sentiment, we are all just wanting to fly digital models of cool places. Well, A-men to that, and I would hope sensible self interest prevails, each team are doing what they must, looking to protect jobs and fair distribution of profit. Brilliant, I hope they find that the truth of it is usually that the good of one party lies in the good of the other and that this disagreement can be resolved to everyone’s satisfaction.

It is one of those situations where you would swear that you had seen it before but cant remember where. Really? Where did you see that?