Jump to content

Virtual Patriots L-39


Recommended Posts

do you think someone more familiar with that plane than a REAL PJT pilot ?

im pretty sure they have the knowledge (at PJT) how can fly that bird - espiecially in close formation

obvious, maybe they dont know the combat usage/employment

 

PJT aren't the only ones that Operate L-39s in a Demonstration configuration, and they arent the only ones to fly it period (there's at least 30 countries that fly it)

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
Share on other sites

  • Replies 222
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i have a question to someone from virtual patriots, you have now developed over two year's on that project, you also have tango in your team who also _nearly_ finished two other 3rd party moduls in that time (hawk and c-101, please correct me if iam wrong), related to that you should be nearly done with your L-39 modul, so why don't you finish the little rest? Or what is that current state of your L-39 modul in percent? 80? 90%? 95%?

 

Why don't you finish that rest work and generate at least some cash from the rest of your code? Do you don't expect that your flight model will be better than the ED one? With all the experience your team has with L-39?

 

Would be very nice to get some clarification and answers from you

 

Read the thread. They have already answered your questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wags said it [ED L-39] was due for release at end of 2014

 

...and there is the crux of the problem. Our development schedule can't possibly mean that our L-39 will be ready before December at the earliest.

 

Due to the requirement that ED must then put the product into testing with their internal test team means that at best, we are looking at a Jan/Feb release, assuming a fast test cycle and no problems.

 

In addition, ED recently introduced this: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=127280

 

So now, not only do we have to develop and test the flight model as part of normal development, but we have to produce test data and get it signed off (separately) by ED. It wouldn't necessarily take long to do on our part, but it is still additional work we were not expecting, and is part of getting release authorization.

 

Best regards,

Tango.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you think someone more familiar with that plane than a REAL PJT pilot ?

im pretty sure they have the knowledge (at PJT) how can fly that bird - espiecially in close formation

obvious, maybe they dont know the combat usage/employment

 

Not sure what you are getting at here. You were mentioning ED just happening to have a cockpit that VP would need for their module, suggesting a potential sale of that cockpit to VP to finish VP's L-39. Since ED's module is set for release in 2014 by Wags own statement, obviously they have a flight model and external model, not just a cockpit. So where does the real PJT pilot come in to what I said?

"Hurled headlong flaming from the ethereal sky; With hideous ruin and combustion down;
To bottomless perdition, there to dwell; In adamantine chains and penal fire"

(RIG info is outdated, will update at some point) i5 @3.7GHz (OC to 4.1), 16GB DDR3, Nvidia GTX 970 4GB, TrackIR 5 & TrackClip Pro, TM Warthog HOTAS, VKB T-Rudder Mk.IV, Razer Blackshark Headset, Obutto Ozone

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and there is the crux of the problem. Our development schedule can't possibly mean that our L-39 will be ready before December at the earliest.

 

That is definitely a problem and I feel bad for you guys. I doubt this idea helps, but is there another variant of the L-39 that isn't being produced by ED you could do? One that you could roll over your existing L-39C work into so you wouldn't have to scratch all that work you've done so far? I'm not familar with the aircraft so I don't know how many variants there are.

"Hurled headlong flaming from the ethereal sky; With hideous ruin and combustion down;
To bottomless perdition, there to dwell; In adamantine chains and penal fire"

(RIG info is outdated, will update at some point) i5 @3.7GHz (OC to 4.1), 16GB DDR3, Nvidia GTX 970 4GB, TrackIR 5 & TrackClip Pro, TM Warthog HOTAS, VKB T-Rudder Mk.IV, Razer Blackshark Headset, Obutto Ozone

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what you are getting at here. You were mentioning ED just happening to have a cockpit that VP would need for their module, suggesting a potential sale of that cockpit to VP to finish VP's L-39. Since ED's module is set for release in 2014 by Wags own statement, obviously they have a flight model and external model, not just a cockpit. So where does the real PJT pilot come in to what I said?

 

we dont know (yet) what they have for the L-39 (by ED), nothing is obvious, nothing is released yet, we dont know how ed get the infos about the flight model of alba or how they done

but

we already know how vpjt got the fm

sign-pic4.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The two situations are completely different. The 3rd Party team is still welcome to release their module. As for Nevada, you are getting 100 times better map than what was offered back then. You know why there are delays, they have communicated those the best they can.

 

As always I can understand both sides. Sure, ED's communication policy was better but it had to be... we are talking about a delay of 3 years.

Sure, ED partners are not ED itself but were are talking about one module which has no complete manual even in out of beta state and another helo module which has no english (or french, german or other language) manual after one year of existence. In meantime there came an AFM, one fully modelled jet and another one is announced for the next month's not mentioning the Cobra helicopter.

 

What I'm trying to say is that if we all would loose patience soon there would be no Nevada, no ED anymore, no Leatherneck simulations and no L-39 forever.

 

I think we should use the brake now, from both sides. Maybe the L-39 Team can get some more months since I think the ED developers have much more assingnments to complete that were promised then publishing a trainer jet which was not even announced the last months.

i9 9900K @ 5,0GHz | 1080GTX | 32GB RAM | 256GB, 512GB & 1TB Samsung SSDs | TIR5 w/ Track Clip | Virpil T-50 Stick with extension + Warthog Throttle | MFG Crosswind pedals | Gametrix 908 Jetseat

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We don't have the widest variety of aircraft in DCS as it is, do we really need 2 developers working on two different versions of the exact same plane.

 

Surely it would have made more sense for ED to make an L-29 or an Alpha Jet or just any other small 2 seat jet for that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey VP's... its a shame what happened to you! I feel with you guys and have to say that the behaviour of some guys here in this thread is embarrassing and it makes me sick to read those biased comments! (my oppinion) ... There are people who say "**** off ... no matter who delivers... i just want the jet"... this is so sad to read... they dont know anything ...

 

I love DCS and i am a huge community fan and it is amazing how much good stuff is, will and was created by some fans and enthusiasts out of this community... but what happened here is just a shame and a nightmare for the Virtual P.'s and i think for the whole community...

 

ED is talking about to long time in development? sorry... this is a joke... We all try to understand the long development process of new engines like EDGE, great quality stuff like all these nice planes you and the modders build for us... but the kick in the ass of VP's is a big failure and this is not what i was expecting here...

 

Why is ED working on a jet nobody was waiting for and is now disappointing some hard working fans by pushing their own ED jet ? Why is ED so hard to VP's , and this is really really hard for those guys...when nobody was waiting for a ED Albatros but waiting for so much other content since years!! My little nice picture of ED, DCS and the community has a big crack now...

 

Sorry for bad english...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

there is a additional point i don't understand.

 

Wags stated that virtual patriots was informed over two weeks ago

 

Over two weeks ago, the head of the Virtual Patriots team was informed of this decision and was supportive of it.

 

last development update from virtual patriots is from 03.09 so my question is why do you decided now so suddently after two weeks of acknowlege and continued development to stop?


Edited by tobaschi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a regretable situation. Two teams working on same project.

 

What is obviously here is a lack of communication from all involved parties. Working with 3rd parties involves very clear flows and communication channels which were missing in this case, or in best case were insufficient. This way of working is in the begining and I think this is a sort of collateral damages for both sides: VP for time lost, ED for some image impact.

 

What about their customers? I mean we, which we will buy these products? Should we start blame VP or ED? Or we better try encourage them? I think we need to encourage, both of them, equally.

 

Core and 3rd parties - this is a symbiotic mechanism. You really need each other to exist.

 

VP: try to adapt existing code to some civil plane, one for which you can easily obtain the approvals. Be you the very first breaking the ice, use this oportunity. You have all necessary backround and more over. Or, you can look to IAR99 .. maybe you will be surprised about it. Also, a bit different, however worth to have a look into is IAR93.

 

From wiki:

IAR 99 "Șoim" (Hawk) is an advanced jet trainer and light attack aircraft capable of performing close air support and reconnaissance missions. The IAR 99 is intended to replace the Aero L-29 Delfin and L-39 Albatros as trainer from the Romanian Air Force inventory. The aircraft is of semi-monocoque design, with tapered wings and a swept back tail unit. A large blade-type antenna installed beneath the nose on the port side of the fuselage gives the IAR 99 trainer a distinctive appearance.

 

I for sure will buy any IAR :D !


Edited by Abburo

Romanian Community for DCS World

HW Specs: AMD 7900X, 64GB RAM, RTX 4090, HOTAS Virpil, MFG, CLS-E, custom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
This is a regretable situation. Two teams working on same project.

 

It wasnt a case of two parties working on the same project, it was ED deciding to continue with theirs (which traces back many years ago) as they didnt feel this teams was moving along at a reasonable pace.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey VP's... its a shame what happened to you! I feel with you guys and have to say that the behaviour of some guys here in this thread is embarrassing and it makes me sick to read those biased comments! (my oppinion) ... There are people who say "**** off ... no matter who delivers... i just want the jet"... this is so sad to read... they dont know anything ...

 

I love DCS and i am a huge community fan and it is amazing how much good stuff is, will and was created by some fans and enthusiasts out of this community... but what happened here is just a shame and a nightmare for the Virtual P.'s and i think for the whole community...

 

ED is talking about to long time in development? sorry... this is a joke... We all try to understand the long development process of new engines like EDGE, great quality stuff like all these nice planes you and the modders build for us... but the kick in the ass of VP's is a big failure and this is not what i was expecting here...

 

Why is ED working on a jet nobody was waiting for and is now disappointing some hard working fans by pushing their own ED jet ? Why is ED so hard to VP's , and this is really really hard for those guys...when nobody was waiting for a ED Albatros but waiting for so much other content since years!! My little nice picture of ED, DCS and the community has a big crack now...

 

Sorry for bad english...

 

Dude..you should calm down and read through the posts again..ED did not want to fool VP..they just started to develop the MP Cockpit stuff an had (unfortunatley for VP) a semi developed L-39..which is a dual seater...and perfect for their needs..but o.k. no doubt this is really unfortunate for the VP Guys. This is business..and not sweetie-land...

My Specs:

I don`t care..it is a Computer..a black one..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude..you should calm down and read through the posts again..ED did not want to fool VP..they just started to develop the MP Cockpit stuff an had (unfortunatley for VP) a semi developed L-39..which is a dual seater...and perfect for their needs..but o.k. no doubt this is really unfortunate for the VP Guys. This is business..and not sweetie-land...

 

Hey dude... i read through all the posts... from Ed, from VP's and all the others... they did not want fool?! but they did now...!

 

ok you're one of those "its business" and "shit happened guys" ... me not... sorry... you can tell it business if they were in competition lbut i think that wasnt the fact...

 

for example, In my oppinion ED had choosen another jet like Mig-29UB for a testbed... there is also just a trainer backseat like in the L-39, no extra avionics and so on... so in this case they had developped the new and long awaited flight physics of the Mig-29, had a testbed for MP cockpits and its the same flight physics like the single seater... erverybody would be happy... but this just for example...


Edited by hocician
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...it was ED deciding to continue with theirs...as they didnt feel this teams was moving along at a reasonable pace.

 

If ED really said this somewhere, please quote it. They never told us they were concerned with the rate of progress.

 

Major points in the history of this project:

 

* May 2012 - Project start

* Jan 2013 - SDK access opened up (8 months since start of project) - code re-built

* Sep 2014 - Project halted (20 months after SDK access, 28 months since start of project)

 

Until we had SDK access, we could not even develop an AFM, so that has been in development for 1 year and 8 months. Given SE developed all kinds of custom tools to do this, on top of the core flight model development, this is pretty rapid progress for a first project!

 

I fail to see how we were somehow "slow" (and given that the L-39 is one of the most advanced 3rd party projects, of any 3rd party project known to exist, well...).

 

In the meantime I worked on Hawk and C-101 as well!

 

Best regards,

Tango.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have a question to someone from virtual patriots, you have now developed over two year's on that project, you also have tango in your team who also _nearly_ finished two other 3rd party moduls in that time (hawk and c-101, please correct me if iam wrong), related to that you should be nearly done with your L-39 modul, so why don't you finish the little rest? Or what is that current state of your L-39 modul in percent? 80? 90%? 95%?

 

Why don't you finish that rest work and generate at least some cash from the rest of your code? Do you don't expect that your flight model will be better than the ED one? With all the experience your team has with L-39?

 

Would be very nice to get some clarification and answers from you

This was also already answered by Tango. They would have to buy a cockpit but decided against it as they saw no future in putting more money into the project after EDs announcement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As always I can understand both sides. Sure, ED's communication policy was better but it had to be... we are talking about a delay of 3 years.

 

ED is talking about to long time in development?

 

It wasnt a case of two parties working on the same project, it was ED deciding to continue with theirs (which traces back many years ago) as they didnt feel this teams was moving along at a reasonable pace.

 

I don't think it is about ED "losing patience" or ED "not being satified with the progress". It is more likely about a "non competition agreement" that ran out now. That is at least how I interprete Wags statement

Eagle Dynamics has had an L-39 in development for several years. However, we put it on the back-burner after we awarded the Virtual Patriots team a license to create their own. A very lengthy amount of time was awarded to them and we feel that it is now no longer sound to hold off on our internal L-39 any longer.

Maybe the tipping point was then that it looked to ED that the product would also not be ready in a forseeable time frame (was ED informed about the imminent cockpit purchase?).

I don't think, EDs intent here is to stop the VPJT product - if they would release it asap. That VPJT are probably unable to pull that off is not the point here (again, how detailed is ED informed about the VPJT project schedule?), the point is that ED does not intend to hinder them.

 

Yes, it is a shitty situation and maybe with better communications in both directions things could have solved differently? I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because it looks bad, because it makes the community and I'm sure other 3rd party developers believe if this happened once it will likely happen again so why would they develop for DCS World?

 

How can you not see that? You have a developer who has invested 2 years of money and time into a project to find only a few weeks ago it was all for not? No company in their right mind would take that risk.

 

^This.

 

Sounds like ED have raised the bar for entering into a contract to a point that would have killed off all the current 3rd party projects if the new standards had been in place back when they began.

 

5. This was one of the first 3rd party license agreements we granted. Our requirements for licenses has changed drastically. This same project (even in its current state after two years), would not have passed current 3rd party project requirements to get a license now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a really sad situation IMO. I feel that ED made a great decision by opening DCS world to 3rd party developers. I am hoping together they can take this hobby to anouther level and wider audience. On one hand I can understand how It makes sence that if they have a mostly done platform to implement a innovative new feature "muti-pit" then it is cost effective to complete its development themselves. On the other hand I feel these 3rd party developers will play a big part in DCS worlds success and I worry about this souring future relationships. My two cents


Edited by smnwrx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
I don't think it is about ED "losing patience" or ED "not being satified with the progress". It is more likely about a "non competition agreement" that ran out now. That is at least how I interprete Wags statement

 

Sorta translates the same, regardless, they felt that moving ahead with theirs made more sense, I dont think there is anything I can say now in this thread that wont be taken the wrong way, so It is what it is... We need to get this out of our systems and move forward somehow.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I don't understand is, if ED only recently decided to go ahead and their module is not that far from release, it doesn't seem far fetched to assume that that the module was probably quite advanced in development when they decided to put it on hold, right? If so, why would they give a green light to a 3rd party developer to work on a module they already have on hold in an advanced state? It seems rather probable that one of those would go to waste, especially in case the aircraft is not hugely popular (i.e. we're not talking about an F-4, F-14, etc. here)..

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tango, whilst I feel for you guys missing out on exclusivity I'm sure you'd still be able to sell this aircraft if you finish based on the passion of a lot of the people posting.

 

But am I wrong in saying that the Virtual Patriots have always been making flyable L-39s to use in their virtual aerobatic routines for the past 5 years at least? I remember watching their routines in 2010 online.

 

These aircraft are designed to look great on the outside and fly well, but often have a rudimentary cockpit.

 

It seems to me that a lot of the L-39 won't be wasted or are you guys saying this jet will now be deleted and used by not used by the team in displays?

 

It's not about exclusivity. We welcome competition. We're not afraid of that. We have a very strong product, that if it could reach completion, would raise the bar for ED as well as other 3PD.

 

The L-39 will get finished by VPJT, only it won't be seen on the DCS platform.

 

Best regards,

Tango.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...