What about the Mirage2000-5 ?

[MisterVince]

Does RAZBAM plan to add the Mirage2000-5 in the futur ?

 

It would be great because this version of the Mirage2000 is the real competitor to the F16, F18 or Su27 and MiG29.

[jojo]

The key to make a module isn't the wishes, but available data :smilewink:

[Buzzles]

Also, it's about being realistic in business sense.

 

I'm going to take a wild stab and say having to remodel the cockpit, make new systems and tweak the FM probably isn't viable when there's the 2000C in game.

[jojo]

From a market point of view, I think a Fox 3 capable Mirage 2000 would be popular.

The airframe remains the same, the engine too. It's "just" about cockpit and weapon system.

But it would be difficult to find accurate and in depth data about that.

[Silver_Dragon]

And a Dassault license.

[gavagai]

And a Dassault license.

 

Eagle Dynamics sought a license from Dassault to include the Mirage 2000-5 and its MICA missiles in the game as an AI aircraft? Or the law is different for AI versus player flown aircraft? Is a lawsuit a real possibility (I doubt it). I'm a little confused about where this is going.:huh:

[Nooch]

The key to make a module isn't the wishes, but available data :smilewink:

 

Exactly, it's all about the amount of data and information they are able to get on that specific aircraft. If it was just based on wishes we would also already have a F-22 for DCS! :)

[Silver_Dragon]

Eagle Dynamics sought a license from Dassault to include the Mirage 2000-5 and its MICA missiles in the game as an AI aircraft? Or the law is different for AI versus player flown aircraft? Is a lawsuit a real possibility (I doubt it). I'm a little confused about where this is going.:huh:

 

Someone they can need a license to show a AI model on a simulator but you always require some type of license to build and release a "pilot-able" module.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Silver_Dragon

[Fer_Fer]

Eagle Dynamics sought a license from Dassault to include the Mirage 2000-5 and its MICA missiles in the game as an AI aircraft? Or the law is different for AI versus player flown aircraft? Is a lawsuit a real possibility (I doubt it). I'm a little confused about where this is going.:huh:

 

Simply put, the trouble is that while the model itself is not protected under copyright. If you make a model of it, it can be seen as more of a tribute, hence, somebody will not confuse a model with the real deal. so while basic performance parameters and looks are not protected. the problem is that the specifics are, the moment you start accurately modelling systems and its characteristics, you start to make what is essentially a copy, which does infringe on people's IP. This is what happened with the EA versus Bell, where EA had made an exact copy of several Bell helo's that were found to be too resembling that they were forced to pay for a licence.

 

So, in the case of the Mirage 2000-5 in game, there will be no lawsuit over it, after all, while it looks like a mirage, its somebody's personal model, and lacks the distinctive features that are protected under IP law.

 

The second bigger issue is that even if they managed to sort out the legal problems, the problem is that the AdA will simply say no. the french are incredibly paranoid about their military hardware, and tend to not share a lot of info with the public. Compare the French Mirage III manual to the Australian one, IIRC the French one was 80 pages while the Australian one was 250+, including flight performance parameters.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Fer_Fer

[Kev2go]

Simply put, the trouble is that while the model itself is not protected under copyright. If you make a model of it, it can be seen as more of a tribute, hence, somebody will not confuse a model with the real deal. so while basic performance parameters and looks are not protected. the problem is that the specifics are, the moment you start accurately modelling systems and its characteristics, you start to make what is essentially a copy, which does infringe on people's IP. This is what happened with the EA versus Bell, where EA had made an exact copy of several Bell helo's that were found to be too resembling that they were forced to pay for a licence.

 

So, in the case of the Mirage 2000-5 in game, there will be no lawsuit over it, after all, while it looks like a mirage, its somebody's personal model, and lacks the distinctive features that are protected under IP law.

 

The second bigger issue is that even if they managed to sort out the legal problems, the problem is that the AdA will simply say no. the french are incredibly paranoid about their military hardware, and tend to not share a lot of info with the public. Compare the French Mirage III manual to the Australian one, IIRC the French one was 80 pages while the Australian one was 250+, including flight performance parameters.

 

so paranoid just like the Russians, when they sent a cease and Desist to ED when they tried to make more modern variations of the Su27 and mig29. ( think it was the SM variants)

 

seems only the United States are reasonably open with thier 4th generation platforms, since ED had the nessary info to work on creating the F/A18C hornet module. ( and enough to have previously made the F15C, albiet at FC standards & the A10C)

 

considering M2000-5s avoincs systems would comparable enough to it and F16.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Kev2go

[tombeckett2285]

I may be totally wrong, but you only need a license if you use any part of the copyrighted names or if a particular design shape has rights reserved (the 747 for example is such a shape). The shape of the Mirage is recognisable but not entirely unique amongst military aircraft, and I notice nowhere do Razbam use the Mirage name - it's always M2000C which may squeeze through a loophole. Besides, think of the huge amount of software produced for FSX that more than likely is not licensed by the manufacturers - I don't see them being pursued and shut down.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Buzzles]

I may be totally wrong, but you only need a license if you use any part of the copyrighted names or if a particular design shape has rights reserved (the 747 for example is such a shape). The shape of the Mirage is recognisable but not entirely unique amongst military aircraft, and I notice nowhere do Razbam use the Mirage name - it's always M2000C which may squeeze through a loophole. Besides, think of the huge amount of software produced for FSX that more than likely is not licensed by the manufacturers - I don't see them being pursued and shut down.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Don't mix Copyright and IP as they're different things. DCS licences are mostly IP related as they're trying to accurately simulate functionality of the aircraft and its systems.

 

Also, Razbam do have a licence with Dassault, they've said one of the specific terms was they're not to use "Mirage", hence why you never see it.

Edited September 18, 2016 by Buzzles

[tombeckett2285]

Happy to stand corrected in the minefield of intellectual property and copyright, I'm not a law expert.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Silver_Dragon]

That stament has wrong. FSX and DCS: World has totally difference sims and "worlds" about IPs.

[rrohde]

so paranoid just like the Russians, when they sent a cease and Desist to ED when they tried to make more modern variations of the Su27 and mig29.

 

Source?

[gavagai]

Very informative discussion. I had no idea ED received a cease-and-desist over proposed modules!

[Buzzles]

Very informative discussion. I had no idea ED received a cease-and-desist over proposed modules!

 

Nor did I, and considering Kev2Go has only been on the forum for 18 months, I'd like see a source of that information gem. Not saying it doesn't exist mind, as I pretty much never check the Russian section.

[Silver_Dragon]

Nor did I, and considering Kev2Go has only been on the forum for 18 months, I'd like see a source of that information gem. Not saying it doesn't exist mind, as I pretty much never check the Russian section.

 

The stament of Kev2Go has wrong. ED has not receive a "Cease and Demise" about russian aircrafts. ED dont get a "license" to build a "hardcore" module by the russian government by actual russian military secret law.

[Chrinik]

Eagle Dynamics sought a license from Dassault to include the Mirage 2000-5 and its MICA missiles in the game as an AI aircraft? Or the law is different for AI versus player flown aircraft? Is a lawsuit a real possibility (I doubt it). I'm a little confused about where this is going.:huh:

 

Essentially, since DCS World is free, you have to have no license as you are not breaking copyright or IP infringement by profiting from someones IP. If you intend to SELL someone a product that includes IP from licence holders, THEN you have a problem.

 

Which is why the M-2000C is not called "Dassault Mirage 2000C"...Either they don´t have a license for the name, or they have been asked to not call it like that.

 

Hoggitdev is also making an A-4...without license and for free (I pressume), and specifically stating it is an "hommage to the classic aircraft" to get around IP problems.

Edited September 19, 2016 by Chrinik

[gavagai]

The stament of Kev2Go has wrong. ED has not receive a "Cease and Demise" about russian aircrafts. ED dont get a "license" to build a "hardcore" module by the russian government by actual russian military secret law.

 

Thank you for clearing that up. It is more as I expected. So why did suggest that a Dassault license would be required for a 2000-5?

[Silver_Dragon]

Has a very plausible.

[MisterVince]

So mainly because of the lack of precise data, the developpment of a M2000-5 (or M2000D for example) would not be possible, because not accurate enough ?

[Kev2go]

Nor did I, and considering Kev2Go has only been on the forum for 18 months, I'd like see a source of that information gem. Not saying it doesn't exist mind, as I pretty much never check the Russian section.

 

# Google and / or forum search function

 

You don't have to be a long time forum goer to know stuff from old posts.

 

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3824737/Su_27SM_module_delayed

 

 

OK I was quoting from memory, but point was that law prevented them from making a certain module despite info potentially being out there.

[Silver_Dragon]

Kev2Go My post on SimHQ dont see nothing about a "Cease and Desime", only confirm the actual "restrictive security act" on function on Russia, and the "directive" of ED from not use any leaked or restricted info on a module develop.

[Buzzles]

but point was that law prevented them from making a certain module despite info potentially being out there.

 

I already knew ED had been stopped by Russian Military over the SM variant, and that's completely different to what you originaly said though as you explicitly stated they had a C&D, hence questioning it.

 

 

Still, veering massively off topic.

 

Long and short, probably not getting a 2000-5.