Darkwolf Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] PC simulator news site. Also....Join the largest DCS community on Facebook :pilotfly: Link to comment
Flagrum Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Dang ... But before you are now looking for what to do next - true to the tradition of the DCS community, I will (mis)use this opportunity to suggest/wish for either a F-104 Starfighter or the Alpha Jet! Thanks! ;o) (j/k ... but scnr) Link to comment
Buckeye Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Sad to hear, I was excited for these to make it to DCS. Thanks for keeping us in the know, your open communication is much appreciated. VR Cockpit (link): Custom Throttletek F/A-18C Throttle w/ Hall Sensors + Otto switches | Slaw Device RX Viper Pedals w/ Damper | VPC T-50 Base + 15cm Black Sahaj Extension + TM Hornet or Warthog Grip | Super Warthog Wheel Stand Pro | Steelcase Leap V2 + JetSeat SE VR Rig: Pimax 5K+ | ASUS ROG Strix 1080Ti | Intel i7-9700K | Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Master | Corsair H115i RGB Platinum | 32GB Corsair Vengeance Pro RGB 3200 | Dell U3415W Curved 3440x1440 Link to comment
ED Team BIGNEWY Posted October 27, 2014 ED Team Share Posted October 27, 2014 A shame, but perfectly understandable. Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2 Link to comment
SkateZilla Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Hi Guys, Unfortunately I have some not so good news on this project. As a responsible developer one of our golden rules is that we will not develop a module without an agreement or waiver from an aircraft manufacturer, its common knowledge that this was one of the main hold ups with development of the Hawk. As such we have been in talks with McDonnell Douglas (A division of Boeing) regarding obtaining agreements for the A-4C and the A-4M Skyhawks. Sadly the terms offered to us in exchange for the licence are not economically viable for the project to continue. Therefore we have to stop works on the Skyhawk and park the project indefinitely. Obviously this is a disappointing development not least for the DCS community but the members from the VEAO development team who have put blood sweat and tears into the project. I want to publically thank the members of the Skyhawk development team for their hard work and commitment to this project. But one thing in life is for sure, as one door closes another one opens. Obviously due to the sensitive nature of commercial discussions such as this there is only limited amount of information that we can divulge in public but true to the nature of the relationship Chris and I work hard to maintain with you all we wanted to bring you this news as soon as we were able. On behalf of everyone at VEAO we thank you for your understanding regarding this announcement. Pman VEAO Consumer Products Manager. This is bad news indeed, seems we are heading right back to 2002 when Lockheed and General Dynamics wanted to bankrupt entertainment companies over licensing costs and disputes. I recall that they had to settle as Lockheed cant control the visual , systems or military designation of the airrcraft in entertainment media. The name "Skyhawk" maybe but thats about it. Doing a pro simulatorcontract for actual professional ( and not consumer use) is also a bit more complicated. Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2), ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9) 3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs Link to comment
NRG-Vampire Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 This is bad news indeed, seems we are heading right back to 2002... ^ perhaps this is the reason why we wont get an F-16 module neither a newer/facelifted official external 3d model :cry: :wallbash: Link to comment
cichlidfan Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 ^ perhaps this is the reason why ... neither a newer/facelifted official external 3d model :cry: :wallbash: What does one have to with the other? ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup: Link to comment
Abburo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 That's too bad... Next time they (Boeing) will come to pay you for build it in DCS ... for their own publicity! And we wonder why not so many modern jets.. :D Romanian Community for DCS World HW Specs: AMD 7900X, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090, HOTAS Virpil, MFG, CLS-E, custom Link to comment
Pman Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 This is bad news indeed, seems we are heading right back to 2002 when Lockheed and General Dynamics wanted to bankrupt entertainment companies over licensing costs and disputes. I recall that they had to settle as Lockheed cant control the visual , systems or military designation of the airrcraft in entertainment media. The name "Skyhawk" maybe but thats about it. Doing a pro simulatorcontract for actual professional ( and not consumer use) is also a bit more complicated. Its a little more complicated than that. We could do an FC3 level aircraft without too many problems as long as we called it DCS: A-4C or the like with no clickable pit or ASM systems. That would then count as an artistic impression of the aircraft and would not infringe on current IP laws. As soon as you start replicating systems such as engine behavior and management, radars, fuel systems etc etc then thats an entirely different ball game. That is then a replication of someones work and does need IP approval. So without the agreement from McDonnell Douglas we could never do a ASM for the Skyhawk and doing an FC level module is not what VEAO is about :) Military Spec, thats our standard and it doesnt drop for anything or anyone :) Pman Link to comment
ED Team NineLine Posted October 27, 2014 ED Team Share Posted October 27, 2014 ^ perhaps this is the reason why we wont get an F-16 module neither a newer/facelifted official external 3d model :cry: :wallbash: Come on guys, lets not get carried away here... this announcement only effects this aircraft at this time... no need to go all assumption crazy... Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment
cichlidfan Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Next time they (Boeing) will come to pay you for build it in DCS ... for their own publicity! Somehow I don't think Boeing is looking for ways to publicize a 60 year old aircraft as part of a marketing strategy. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup: Link to comment
X93355 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 That is sad news indeed. This does show good ethical decisions from VEAO though Pman. Thanks for keeping us in the loop. Just wondering if the Cortex team have good contacts at Boeing with their development that might be able to help? InWin S Frame with Asus Z170 | i7-6700K @ 4.5 Water Cooled CPU and Graphics | 16GB DDR4 | GTX1070 | 240GB M.2 SSD | Warthog Hotas | MFG Crosswind | 40" Samsung 4K | CV1 | Replica MB Mk10 Ejection Seat with Gametrix 908 Link to comment
Abburo Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Somehow I don't think Boeing is looking for ways to publicize a 60 year old aircraft as part of a marketing strategy. Sure not, but another military opportunity might have "collateral" requests... :D ... Romanian Community for DCS World HW Specs: AMD 7900X, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090, HOTAS Virpil, MFG, CLS-E, custom Link to comment
WinterH Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Damn shame :/ A-4, and in both C & M versions, was among the modules I wanted most. It is pretty crazy for those folks at Boeing asking crazy stuff for granting licences to create virtual versions of 50 odd years old planes. Wishlist: F-4E Block 53 +, MiG-27K, Su-17M3 or M4, AH-1F or W circa 80s or early 90s, J35 Draken, Kfir C7, Mirage III/V DCS-Dismounts Script Link to comment
Python Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 This is sad to hear but completely out of your hands of course. Can I ask if you have any thoughts yet on which aircraft you expect to be jumped to the front row of the planned list in place of this? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment
SkateZilla Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Dang ... But before you are now looking for what to do next - true to the tradition of the DCS community, I will (mis)use this opportunity to suggest/wish for either a F-104 Starfighter or the Alpha Jet! Thanks! ;o) (j/k ... but scnr) Lockheed is thr worst one when it comes to negotiating contracts, especially when it involves Starfighter, Hercules, and Falcon. Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2), ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9) 3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs Link to comment
MoGas Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 That is sad news indeed. This does show good ethical decisions from VEAO though Pman. Thanks for keeping us in the loop. Just wondering if the Cortex team have good contacts at Boeing with their development that might be able to help? Good question, a Super Hornet is possible and a Skyhawk not! Something is rong here! Link to comment
SkateZilla Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Its a little more complicated than that. We could do an FC3 level aircraft without too many problems as long as we called it DCS: A-4C or the like with no clickable pit or ASM systems. That would then count as an artistic impression of the aircraft and would not infringe on current IP laws. As soon as you start replicating systems such as engine behavior and management, radars, fuel systems etc etc then thats an entirely different ball game. That is then a replication of someones work and does need IP approval. So without the agreement from McDonnell Douglas we could never do a ASM for the Skyhawk and doing an FC level module is not what VEAO is about :) Military Spec, thats our standard and it doesnt drop for anything or anyone :) Pman Yeah, I figured the ASM and AFM would Complicate things and throw artist representation out the window. But the fact is the price gouging that occured in early 2000's that essentially killed off High Fidelity Flight Sims for a while is coming back. For some dumb reason the manufacturers automatically assume that since your developing to Mil-spec that you have or will have the income of a large military contract and they completely overlook the fact that small companies developing for consumer entertainment flight simulators do not have the financial ability to cover their insane terms. Windows 10 Pro, Ryzen 2700X @ 4.6Ghz, 32GB DDR4-3200 GSkill (F4-3200C16D-16GTZR x2), ASRock X470 Taichi Ultimate, XFX RX6800XT Merc 310 (RX-68XTALFD9) 3x ASUS VS248HP + Oculus HMD, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS + MFDs Link to comment
NRG-Vampire Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) Yeah, I figured the ASM and AFM would Complicate things and throw artist representation out the window. But the fact is the price gouging that occured in early 2000's that essentially killed off High Fidelity Flight Sims for a while is coming back. For some dumb reason the manufacturers automatically assume that since your developing to Mil-spec that you have or will have the income of a large military contract and they completely overlook the fact that small companies developing for consumer entertainment flight simulators do not have the financial ability to cover their insane terms. ^ yes :cry: i guess (pretty sure) McDonnell Douglas/Boeing gave a too high pricetag for the licenses/rights/documentations and VEAO guys know the most user wont able too pay the bill however i can understand why ED developed only one modern full-DCS plane till now (A-10C) because USAF paid that bill (mainly) and navy/marines will pay(paid) for the f-18c as well maybe that's why ED turned towards to the WWII aircrafts too (cheaper development and licence costs) Edited October 27, 2014 by NRG-Vampire Link to comment
71st_Mastiff Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 well I still don't understand the US Government paid for the equipment, the tax's payer owns it not the company that's making it, and beside wasn't there a lawsuit against those said companies for rights and freedom of art and expression of those US equipment? Next all those Battle gear equipment that the US Army uses in Call of duty, Battle Field 4, Arma I, II, III. Those companies now have the right to sue for the use and artist representation in those games? " any failure you meet, is never a defeat; merely a set up for a greater come back, " W Forbes "Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts," Winston Churchill " He who never changes his mind, never changes anything," MSI z690 MPG DDR4 || i9-14900k|| ddr4-64gb PC3200 || MSI RTX 4080S|Game1300w|Win11| |turtle beach elite pro 5.1|| ViRpiL,T50cm2||MFG Crosswinds|| VT50CM-plus rotor Throttle || G10 RGB EVGA Keyboard/MouseLogitech || PiMax Crystal VR || 32 Asus|| Link to comment
NRG-Vampire Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) Those companies now have the right to sue for the use and artist representation in those games? i dont think so, but we can see how they show/display the modern aircraft/choppers in ARMA3 : fictional/hybrid stuffs/names :D (vehicles too) Edited October 27, 2014 by NRG-Vampire Link to comment
cichlidfan Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 well I still don't understand the US Government paid for the equipment, the tax's payer owns it not the company that's making it... I believe it has been established that the government/taxpayers do not own the IP rights in these cases. ASUS ROG Maximus VIII Hero, i7-6700K, Noctua NH-D14 Cooler, Crucial 32GB DDR4 2133, Samsung 950 Pro NVMe 256GB, Samsung EVO 250GB & 500GB SSD, 2TB Caviar Black, Zotac GTX 1080 AMP! Extreme 8GB, Corsair HX1000i, Phillips BDM4065UC 40" 4k monitor, VX2258 TouchScreen, TIR 5 w/ProClip, TM Warthog, VKB Gladiator Pro, Saitek X56, et. al., MFG Crosswind Pedals #1199, VolairSim Pit, Rift CV1 :thumbup: Link to comment
Mode1961 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Also, and this is MOST important. Look up Controlled Goods regulations and ITARS. Someone referenced the Cortex guys. There is a very real possibility that if the Cortex guys are US Citizens this changes the game as well, especially when it comes to ITARS. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_Regulations Link to comment
Gladman Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 One of my favorite aircraft. Very unfortunate. i9 9900K @ 5.1Ghz - ASUS Maximus Hero XI - 32GB 4266 DDR4 RAM - ASUS RTX 2080Ti - 1 TB NVME - NZXT Kraken 62 Watercooling System - Thrustmaster Warthog Hotas (Virpil Base) - MFG Crosswind Pedals - Pimax 5K+ VFA-25 Fist Of The Fleet [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic99190_2.gif[/sigpic] Virtual Carrier Strike Group 1 | Discord Link to comment
71st_Mastiff Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 I believe it has been established that the government/taxpayers do not own the IP rights in these cases. then cancel the military projects for them! " any failure you meet, is never a defeat; merely a set up for a greater come back, " W Forbes "Success is not final, failure is not fatal, it is the courage to continue that counts," Winston Churchill " He who never changes his mind, never changes anything," MSI z690 MPG DDR4 || i9-14900k|| ddr4-64gb PC3200 || MSI RTX 4080S|Game1300w|Win11| |turtle beach elite pro 5.1|| ViRpiL,T50cm2||MFG Crosswinds|| VT50CM-plus rotor Throttle || G10 RGB EVGA Keyboard/MouseLogitech || PiMax Crystal VR || 32 Asus|| Link to comment
Recommended Posts