waiting for resolution RAZBAM Situation Post Archive (will be deleted)

[scommander2]

For F-15E, I downloaded the manual with filename "F-15E Manual 23.06.14.pdf".  I guess that it was old (I may be wrong)...

[MAXsenna]

No, just downloaded the F-15E to have a nosey at and it's dated 23.06.14, guessing that's 14.06.23 for me

Just install the modules you don't have by command line, grab the manual and uninstall.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

For F-15E, I downloaded the manual with filename "F-15E Manual 23.06.14.pdf".  I guess that it was old (I may be wrong)...

14?

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[TKhaos]

3 minutes ago, scommander2 said:

For F-15E, I downloaded the manual with filename "F-15E Manual 23.06.14.pdf".  I guess that it was old (I may be wrong)...

The one on Chuck's Guides is dated 17/07/2024 so guessing so.

4 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Just install the modules you don't have by command line, grab the manual and uninstall.

Handy to know

[scommander2]

Opened the PDF file:

[TKhaos]

7 minutes ago, scommander2 said:

Opened the PDF file:

Almost 16 months out of date so not such a big issue if they remove that from the website as well

[MAXsenna]

Opened the PDF file:

You had me fooled there for a second.

Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

[Tavo89]

I hope at some point this issue between RB and ED will be resolved, I am in need of other weapons on the Eagle such as the Maverick and AGM-130.

But I also hope it is Razbam that finishes the Eagle development, they were doing an excellent job. 

[Davee]

2 hours ago, Tavo89 said:

I hope at some point this issue between RB and ED will be resolved, I am in need of other weapons on the Eagle such as the Maverick and AGM-130.

But I also hope it is Razbam that finishes the Eagle development, they were doing an excellent job. 

You may not like the resolution you wish for.   Just sayin'.

[PD919]

3 hours ago, Tavo89 said:

I hope at some point this issue between RB and ED will be resolved, I am in need of other weapons on the Eagle such as the Maverick and AGM-130.

But I also hope it is Razbam that finishes the Eagle development, they were doing an excellent job. 

I'd rather have Heatblur or ED finish the Eagle.  Ask Chuck about how RAZBAM treats their customers.

[Mizzy]

On 10/6/2024 at 5:12 AM, PD919 said:

I'd rather have Heatblur or ED finish the Eagle.  Ask Chuck about how RAZBAM treats their customers.

I hope this is the way it's heading. One thing appears to be the case, Razbam didn't develop the F15E, they published it on behalf of freelance developers. Why do I say this ! it's because it also appears the Publisher does not have the source code and the F15E model belongs to ED. 

Just speculation based on some facts so please people, don't bite my head off and if you know this to be wrong, please by all means correct me with tangible facts, not the Discord (unless quoting an official statement) or the Reddit toilet gathering community 'exposing' (pun intended) a few DCS disgruntled people with a grudge.

Happy virtual flying x

Mizzy

Edited October 7, 2024 by Mizzy
Corrected a misunderstanding.

[Devil 505]

21 hours ago, TKhaos said:

I was recently reading about a collaboration between Microprose and Razbam working on the B-17 Flying Fortress for MSFS

If you want the real deal for MSFS, go to Flying Iron Simulations website (gents doing the A-7 II Corsair for DCS).  They announced they are doing their B-17 for MSFS.  I am beyond thrilled to hear this.  The work they have accomplished so far for all their WW2 fighters is beyond professional.  I would say Heatblur level of MSFS.  Absolutely cannot wait for them to get the Corsair to DCS.  I think they are going to turn some heads for sure.  

First I heard of Razbam doing anything for MSFS.  Not going to talk sierra about them, just dont plan on supporting unprofessionalism.  

[draconus]

2 hours ago, Mizzy said:

...and the FM was not a full PFM, it was the AFM version the same as the Mirage, Harrier and Mig 19.

No, AFM was used for older ED modules, FC3 mostly. All 3rd party aircraft use EFM and it doesn't mean it's worse or better but here it says PFM for F-15E, don't know why frankly:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/general/#1512209

[Mizzy]

10 hours ago, draconus said:

No, AFM was used for older ED modules, FC3 mostly. All 3rd party aircraft use EFM and it doesn't mean it's worse or better but here it says PFM for F-15E, don't know why frankly:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/general/#1512209

Thanks for that, my information is out of date, or seems to be. 

Thank you for the link, I couldn't be arsed when I should have looked before posting.

Mizzy

 

Edited October 7, 2024 by Mizzy
Misinformation deleted.

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Mizzy said:

The Harrier is a AFM according to its description

What I see there is EFM for all Razbam modules except F-15E.

Edit: Oh, now I see - from the descriptions of aircraft in the E-shop:

F-15E - Advanced Flight Model

M-2000C - Advanced flight model

AV-8B - Advanced Flight Model

MiG-19P - External flight model

Highly confusing but I think they don't mean the actual ED AFM here, ex. F-14 and Viggen also have such description.

Edited October 6, 2024 by draconus

[Mizzy]

10 hours ago, draconus said:

Highly confusing but I think they don't mean the actual ED AFM here, ex. F-14 and Viggen also have such description.

 

Ahh yes, I see what you mean, I stand corrected.

Mizzy

[Vakarian]

Jesus, that's just a label. A FM doesn't magically become Professional/Advanced/External by calling it that way. It's just a frigging label to vaguely describe what does it encompass, nothing else. A FM is exactly what the programmer coded, nothing more, nothing less. You can call it "the best flight model ever", nobody cares unless it performs close to the thing it's supposed to represent.

[Mizzy]

38 minutes ago, Vakarian said:

Jesus, that's just a label. A FM doesn't magically become Professional/Advanced/External by calling it that way. It's just a frigging label to vaguely describe what does it encompass, nothing else. A FM is exactly what the programmer coded, nothing more, nothing less. You can call it "the best flight model ever", nobody cares unless it performs close to the thing it's supposed to represent.

Calm down, once upon a time ED explained what the various FMs meant and their various differences, AFM, PFM SFM EFM etc. It appears this is now a bit muddy and people need to know what level of FM the various aircraft are using, it is not just a label hence the list of aircraft and their respective FMs because most of us do not know if it represents the real airframe. This is going off topic but it's all explained here and you can't call an FM whatever you like in DCS! 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/general/#1512209

Edited October 7, 2024 by Mizzy

[Vakarian]

54 minutes ago, Mizzy said:

Calm down, once upon a time ED explained what the various FMs meant and their various differences, AFM, PFM SFM EFM etc. It appears this is now a bit muddy and people need to know what level of FM the various aircraft are using, it is not just a label hence the list of aircraft and their respective FMs because most of us do not know if it represents the real airframe. This is going off topic but it's all explained here and you can't call an FM whatever you like in DCS! 

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/general/#1512209

 

Yes, I'm aware that ED tried to explain it, but still, AFM, PFM, SFM,... that's just a label. There is no checkbox to tick that now makes your FM one of these. FM is what the coder made it to be, it's irrelevant how it's called as that's just the name, nothing else.

Yes, the AFM, PFM, SFM,.... XFM is just a label to vaguely describe what does the FM inherit from DCS engine and what's calculated by the FM itself. It is not a setting a developer chooses! That's the point I'm trying to make

[BIGNEWY]

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/general/

FM terms are explained here 

thank you 

[draconus]

1 minute ago, BIGNEWY said:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/support/faq/general/

FM terms are explained here 

thank you 

I already provided that link. Was hoping that ED will clarify it a bit. Currently the information is confusing and conflicting (general info list vs module descriptions).

[SkateZilla]

SFM, AFM, PFM are standards for ED Products. EFM is for 3rd Party *External* Products.

[some1]

3 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

SFM, AFM, PFM are standards for ED Products. EFM is for 3rd Party *External* Products.

Except all the recent 3rd party products are labelled PFM in ED faq. Including F-15E, Kiowa, Phantom etc.

And the store descriptions don't even match the faq.

[SkateZilla]

4 minutes ago, some1 said:

Except all the recent 3rd party products are labelled PFM in ED faq. Including F-15E, Kiowa, Phantom etc.

And the store descriptions don't even match the faq.

Prolly should discuss this elsewhere, but the store page for the F-4E clearly says External Flight Model:

The F-15E states "Advanced" in terms of development, as a key feature, not to be confused with AFM/Advanced Flight Model.

Edited October 7, 2024 by SkateZilla

[some1]

9 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

the store page for the F-4E clearly says External Flight Model:

And the FAQ clearly says PFM for both.

Edited October 7, 2024 by some1

[Mizzy]

2 hours ago, Vakarian said:

 AFM, PFM, SFM,... that's just a label. FM is what the coder made it to be, it's irrelevant how it's called as that's just the name, nothing else.

Yes, the AFM, PFM, SFM,.... XFM is just a label to vaguely describe what does the FM inherit from DCS engine and what's calculated by the FM itself. It is not a setting a developer chooses! That's the point I'm trying to make

You completely misunderstand why ED have different flight models and they are not just labels, they describe the various parameters and complexity of each FM, and not just naming them for the sake of it. They are certainly not vaguely describing a 'label' !! Let's just agree to disagree, I don't think our debate is going anywhere.