Please add the famous Harrier spool down sound

[104th_Maverick]

Would this ever be possible for future?

 

 

The current implementation has a fantastic engine running sound that matches the real jet perfectly however its missing the iconic spool down sound when the pilot goes idle after a vertical landing.

 

 

I understand its probably one of those 'easier said than done' things to add in to the game however Im sure it would blow the Harrier community away to have this feature added in.

 

 

[Pikey]

It's just missing the crying children and the car alarms going off ;) But... absolutely!

[Marsvinet]

They have stated that it will be added with the new soundpack that is being developed. It is even on the bugtracker.

[Konovalov]

They have stated that it will be added with the new soundpack that is being developed. It is even on the bugtracker.

Correct. Really looking forward to the overhauled sounds for the Harrier.

[bkthunder]

Once again, the superficiality of this module and some of the community is astonishing.

This is not just somethig you fix with a new soundpack!!

 

IT IS A MISSING FEATURE

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220911&page=2

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=245815

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=242790&highlight=solenoid

 

The fast decelaration solenoid allows the engine to spool down very quickly to avoid bouncing up upon touch down.

It is a system, not a sound. This is NOT SIMULATED AT ALL in the DCS harrier, adding to the very long list of missing features and inaccuracies in this module.

Hearing Razbam saying they'll add the sound just goes to show how superficial they are.

 

Sorry for the rant, but I have reported this 1.5 years ago, and others reported it as well. Razbam didn't give two flying poops about it as they did with 90% of all other system-related missing feautres or inaccuracies so far.

Edited March 15, 2020 by bkthunder

[Marsvinet]

Once again, the superficiality of this module and some of the community is astonishing.

This is not just somethig you fix with a new soundpack!!

 

IT IS A MISSING FEATURE

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220911&page=2

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=245815

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=242790&highlight=solenoid

 

The fast decelaration solenoid allows the engine to spool down very quickly to avoid bouncing up upon touch down.

It is a system, not a sound. This is NOT SIMULATED AT ALL in the DCS harrier, adding to the very long list of missing features and inaccuracies in this module.

Hearing Razbam saying they'll add the sound just goes to show how superficial they are.

 

Sorry for the rant, but I have reported this 1.5 years ago, and others reported it as well. Razbam didn't give two flying poops about it as they did with 90% of all other system-related missing feautres or inaccuracies so far.

 

 

Oh for the love of whatever god you like. You are starting to look like ol' Viper around here. Yes, the solenoid is missing, but why assume they are not going to implement it with the new soundpack? Give Razbam some faith instead of calling the community superficial because you do not know what Razbam are doing. Not everybody is a rivet counter and if you are a rivet counter, just chill out about it all. For the record, i'm very much a rivet counter myself, at least when it comes to the Harrier.

 

 

Razbam has been on the right path for a while, so let them do continue their good work without your abuse.

[Cornelius]

Razbam has been on the right path for a while, so let them do continue their good work without your abuse.

 

[bkthunder]

Oh for the love of whatever god you like. You are starting to look like ol' Viper around here.

 

 

Don't lose your hat.

 

Yes, the solenoid is missing, but why assume they are not going to implement it with the new soundpack?

 

Beacuse it's been reported multiple times by different users and never ONCE did anyone from Razbam ackowledge it. Also, because a soundpack, as the name entails, has to do with sounds, not with system modeling. So based on the above and other experiences with bugs and missing features in the Harrier, I assume so. Does that answer your question?

 

 

Give Razbam some faith instead of calling the community superficial because you do not know what Razbam are doing.

 

On what basis? Do you know what razbam is doing? If so, please shed some light. We've been asking for some clarity about this for a while, if you know they're going to implement it please speak up and I'm sure we'll all be very happy.

 

Not everybody is a rivet counter and if you are a rivet counter, just chill out about it all. For the record, i'm very much a rivet counter myself, at least when it comes to the Harrier.

Good for you. I don't count rivets, I do however read the Natops manuals and care about main systems being in place and working correctly. This is meant to be a high fidelity simulator after all.

 

 

Razbam has been on the right path for a while, so let them do continue their good work without your abuse.

 

That's yout opinion and I respect it. I have mine, could you respect that also? I think the word "abuse" is a little strong. If you feel abused by a forum post I suggest you stay away from places where people share facts and opinions you don't like.

How about you argue with some objective facts if you have any?

 

Fact: this is a missing feature.

 

Fact: it's been reported multiple times since 1 year and a half.

 

Will it be implemented?

 

Fact: We don't know because Razbam didn't say a single word about it.

[Marsvinet]

AngryVideoGameNerdGif

I know, right?! I actually think they are doing a good job after their dark age! It's like seeing a unicorn!

Nice long post

 

Oh I lost my hat. Mainly at the simplicity part. Too broad strokes for my taste. And what I said has been cooking for a long time now. Guess you just got unlucky that I could not be arsed to hold back.

 

You are operating off the exact same facts as me. The difference is that you are seem to be seeing everything negative and i'm trying to see it positive (I'd argue neither of us are the realist in this case). I just want to see the Harrier become the best it can be, all systems implemented in as much detail as it can have. You want the same thing. I just try and keep negativity down around here by sharing the information I have whenever somebody asks.

 

As for abuse, I'll stick with what I said. I meant abuse towards Razbam, not me. You're nowhere near where Viper was. What he was doing was just horrendous. But you're constantly around here, belittling Razbam whenever there is a chance. Yes, you are right about what is not implemented, there is a lot, but the constant "reminders" are most probably not changing anything nor helping discussion and progress. Everybody has the right to their opinion. Just chill on the constant reminders. For everybodys sake.

 

(I'd also call you a rivet counter, the natops thing pretty much what a rivet counter does)

 

But whatever we try and write here means jack shit, because the only ones who actually can say anything is Razbam themselves. But they could definitely be more active with their bug reports. It is very confusing around there.

[bkthunder]

I know, right?! I actually think they are doing a good job after their dark age! It's like seeing a unicorn!

 

 

Oh I lost my hat. Mainly at the simplicity part. Too broad strokes for my taste. And what I said has been cooking for a long time now. Guess you just got unlucky that I could not be arsed to hold back.

 

You are operating off the exact same facts as me. The difference is that you are seem to be seeing everything negative and i'm trying to see it positive (I'd argue neither of us are the realist in this case). I just want to see the Harrier become the best it can be, all systems implemented in as much detail as it can have. You want the same thing. I just try and keep negativity down around here by sharing the information I have whenever somebody asks.

 

As for abuse, I'll stick with what I said. I meant abuse towards Razbam, not me. You're nowhere near where Viper was. What he was doing was just horrendous. But you're constantly around here, belittling Razbam whenever there is a chance. Yes, you are right about what is not implemented, there is a lot, but the constant "reminders" are most probably not changing anything nor helping discussion and progress. Everybody has the right to their opinion. Just chill on the constant reminders. For everybodys sake.

 

(I'd also call you a rivet counter, the natops thing pretty much what a rivet counter does)

 

But whatever we try and write here means jack shit, because the only ones who actually can say anything is Razbam themselves. But they could definitely be more active with their bug reports. It is very confusing around there.

 

Thanks, I appreciate you putting things in a better tone, and even though I disagree on some parts, I see your point.

At the end of the day we reach the same conclusion, and I saw that you have been active reporting bugs. Let me tell you, I have bene active reporting bugs too, especially in the beginning. I did (and still do) with a good heart, but seeing reported bugs being constantly ignored, to the point where they are moved to the resolved bugs section, and even having whole threads deleted, well, it kinda leaves a dent.

 

I bought the Harrier full price not by chance, but becasue I really wanted to support Razbam and had faith in their willingess to create a truthful representation of the Harrier. Then it became apparent that despite all the reports, there are all kinds of things that are missing, bugged or simply operate in the wrong way, well, it's disheartening.

You speak about trusting them, but really, what they have shown so far is they actually don't really even know how to fix some things (e.g. the velocity vector). There is a tangible lack of attention to detail and lack of understanding of some systems, it's pretty much all plainly written in the Natops and the Harrier has probably the widest availability of sources where you can find such details, and yet they got basic startup items wrong and these things have never been fixed or even ackowledged.

 

Coming back to my post in this particular thread: I think it's important, since there are another 3 threads about the same thing, that people don't think this is "just" a soundfile issue. Likewise, Razbam shouldn't think a simple sound addition equals a porper simulation of an engine component that is specifc to a VTOL aircraft.

 

As you said very well: "But whatever we try and write here means jack shit, because the only ones who actually can say anything is Razbam themselves. But they could definitely be more active with their bug reports. It is very confusing around there."

[vstolmech513]

Once again, the superficiality of this module and some of the community is astonishing.

This is not just somethig you fix with a new soundpack!!

 

IT IS A MISSING FEATURE

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=220911&page=2

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=245815

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=242790&highlight=solenoid

 

The fast decelaration solenoid allows the engine to spool down very quickly to avoid bouncing up upon touch down.

It is a system, not a sound. This is NOT SIMULATED AT ALL in the DCS harrier, adding to the very long list of missing features and inaccuracies in this module.

Hearing Razbam saying they'll add the sound just goes to show how superficial they are.

 

Sorry for the rant, but I have reported this 1.5 years ago, and others reported it as well. Razbam didn't give two flying poops about it as they did with 90% of all other system-related missing feautres or inaccuracies so far.

 

 

bkthunder,

 

 

FYI, the fast deceleration solenoid has been disabled for close to 20 years now, and is literally just a cannon plug that is cut and zip-tied back on itself. I am sure that you see it in the NATOPS, but there are things in the NATOPS for only 1 aircraft in the entire fleet (not sure how many in this case, just showing an example), since it is used by multiple nations. Spain uses our NATOPS as do the Italians, and their Harrier fleet is not modified or updated with anywhere near the frequency of the US fleet of Harriers. If any change is not done on any aircraft, the old information is left in the NATOPS. Trust me, I tried to get several things taken out or changed in there prior to retiring, but since we are not the only ones using it, it won't change until that/those jet(s) either crash, get modified or retired.

 

 

The sound of the engine going from high RPMs (anything over about 80% LP RPM) to idle <3 seconds is absolutely a one of a kind sound, not a system due to the size of the LPC Blades.

Edited March 16, 2020 by vstolmech513
Added NATOPS reasoning

[Shrike88]

Oh for the love of whatever god you like. You are starting to look like ol' Viper around here. Yes, the solenoid is missing, but why assume they are not going to implement it with the new soundpack? Give Razbam some faith instead of calling the community superficial because you do not know what Razbam are doing. Not everybody is a rivet counter and if you are a rivet counter, just chill out about it all. For the record, i'm very much a rivet counter myself, at least when it comes to the Harrier.

 

 

Razbam has been on the right path for a while, so let them do continue their good work without your abuse.

 

You must be new to the community or just purchased the harrier. Many if us have been here day 0. And have watched the progress, Development and lack of communication as well as reports and bug issues neglected and never answered.

[Shrike88]

bkthunder,

 

 

FYI, the fast deceleration solenoid has been disabled for close to 20 years now, and is literally just a cannon plug that is cut and zip-tied back on itself. I am sure that you see it in the NATOPS, but there are things in the NATOPS for only 1 aircraft in the entire fleet (not sure how many in this case, just showing an example), since it is used by multiple nations. Spain uses our NATOPS as do the Italians, and their Harrier fleet is not modified or updated with anywhere near the frequency of the US fleet of Harriers. If any change is not done on any aircraft, the old information is left in the NATOPS. Trust me, I tried to get several things taken out or changed in there prior to retiring, but since we are not the only ones using it, it won't change until that/those jet(s) either crash, get modified or retired.

 

 

The sound of the engine going from high RPMs (anything over about 80% LP RPM) to idle <3 seconds is absolutely a one of a kind sound, not a system due to the size of the LPC Blades.

 

Well if this is the case and it's disabled IRL, either way then the time for the engine in our harrier to spool down to idle needs to be augmented to line up more with the more rapid response there is in the real jet. Sounds will come also. Upwards of over 6 seconds is clearly not the case when watching the videos and talking with friends in Yuma.

 

Thanks for the insight on the system being disabled with the cannon plug, but regardless Razbam needs to give this whole area another look and some tweaking.

[Marsvinet]

You must be new to the community or just purchased the harrier. Many if us have been here day 0. And have watched the progress, Development and lack of communication as well as reports and bug issues neglected and never answered.

 

 

I pre-purchased the Harrier and I have been flying it constantly since then. It is pretty much my main module at this point.

[vstolmech513]

Real Life Sounds from High Power Ground Run

 

Well if this is the case and it's disabled IRL, either way then the time for the engine in our harrier to spool down to idle needs to be augmented to line up more with the more rapid response there is in the real jet. Sounds will come also. Upwards of over 6 seconds is clearly not the case when watching the videos and talking with friends in Yuma.

 

Thanks for the insight on the system being disabled with the cannon plug, but regardless Razbam needs to give this whole area another look and some tweaking.

 

 

I would agree that the spool-down time that is currently modeled is a bit long, whereas IRL it's somewhere around 4-4 1/2 seconds to spool down. Below is a video of me doing a high power ground run and there are multiple times where I chop the power from high RPMs to idle, first one is around 7:45. Shutdown timer was around 30 seconds from the time I select cutoff and in game it seems a bit rushed, although I haven't timed that yet.

 

 

 

 

 

Video wouldn't play because I'm an idiot and didn't know you only need to put the last part of the YT link... should work now

Edited March 18, 2020 by vstolmech513
Because I'm an idiot...

[bkthunder]

vstolmech513 thanks for your great insights in this thread!

So as others have said the spool-down time is wrong.

As it is now, when I touch down I have to wait a few good seconds before pushing the nozzles fwd, otherwise the jet starts to roll. In RL videos you see that upon touchdown the pilot can go to idle very quickly and rotate the nozzles.

 

P.S. the video you posted is not working

Edited March 18, 2020 by bkthunder

[Mars Exulte]

I would agree that the spool-down time that is currently modeled is a bit long, whereas IRL it's somewhere around 4-4 1/2 seconds to spool down. Below is a video of me doing a high power ground run and there are multiple times where I chop the power from high RPMs to idle, first one is around 7:45. Shutdown timer was around 30 seconds from the time I select cutoff and in game it seems a bit rushed, although I haven't timed that yet.

 

 

 

 

 

Video wouldn't play because I'm an idiot and didn't know you only need to put the last part of the YT link... should work now

 

Ummm.... you gotta any more of that stuff? Asking for a friend ;)

[=DECOY=]

We are reworking all the engine sounds for our aircraft

 

We have the spool down sound and will make sure its added when they are finished :)

[bkthunder]

We are reworking all the engine sounds for our aircraft

 

We have the spool down sound and will make sure its added when they are finished :)

 

@Decoy, please read the posts in this thread. The whole argument here is you keep saying you are adding the SOUND, while all we are saying is the sound is just the tip of the iceberg, because the spool-down time is too long. Can you please confirm or deny that you are correcting the engine behavior as well as the sound?

 

Thanks

[=DECOY=]

We are redoing all sounds which will also mean tweaking engine behaviour

[bkthunder]

We are redoing all sounds which will also mean tweaking engine behaviour

 

:thumbup:

[vstolmech513]

vstolmech513 thanks for your great insights in this thread!

So as others have said the spool-down time is wrong.

As it is now, when I touch down I have to wait a few good seconds before pushing the nozzles fwd, otherwise the jet starts to roll. In RL videos you see that upon touchdown the pilot can go to idle very quickly and rotate the nozzles.

 

P.S. the video you posted is not working

 

Why do you have to wait a few seconds to roll your nozzles back up? Are you holding the brakes down? That's what I do, land vertically with brakes held. If you have significant yaw while in the hover you can use rudder trim to get you steady and then descend. Brakes don't have to be mashed to hold either. Slight press of either brake and then chop to idle as soon as you touch down then immediately roll nozzles up to 0. Also, you shouldn't have much fwd roll if your nozzles are 82-84 for hovering, but if you do the brakes will help.

[Mars Exulte]

@vstol

I got in the habit of doing that, too. I also found it very helpful to have proper descent rate, too fast and you bounce, too slow and you are ''floaty''. I noticed most Harrier landings are a bit ''springy'' compared to conventional landings.

[bkthunder]

Why do you have to wait a few seconds to roll your nozzles back up? Are you holding the brakes down? That's what I do, land vertically with brakes held. If you have significant yaw while in the hover you can use rudder trim to get you steady and then descend. Brakes don't have to be mashed to hold either. Slight press of either brake and then chop to idle as soon as you touch down then immediately roll nozzles up to 0. Also, you shouldn't have much fwd roll if your nozzles are 82-84 for hovering, but if you do the brakes will help.

 

I land pretty well to be honest, without fwd speed and hold breaks when touching down, but if I rotate the nozzles soon after pulling the throttle back (as seen in the RL videos) the airplane tends to move fwd and/or duck the nose as if significant thrust was still being produced.

[bkthunder]

[ADDED TO COMMUNITY BUG TRACKER]

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gYpmYD4VVaTn1YkHd_K7CJxOysoOqdN-K5oZs_anX7c/edit?usp=sharing