So G-Limiter no longer works on cold starts on ground. AC is always limiteed to 6G?

[DmitriKozlowsky]

So G-Limiter no longer works on cold starts on ground. AC is always limiteed to 6G?

 

Edited June 5, 2024 by DmitriKozlowsky

[mikko.1842]

13 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

So G-Limiter no longer works on cold starts on ground. AC is always limiteed to 6G?

You are late to the party. A fix was released for customers, in yesterday's patch (and it has been running privately for at least a week).

But still, it doesn't change the fact that if ED and Razbam can't come to an agreement, Razbam's modules are bound to decay, and not so slowly.

Edited June 6, 2024 by mikko.1842

[DmitriKozlowsky]

I guess I am welcome at the party, to which I am late to. 

But its great that its fixed.

I am returning to M2KC after almost a year, and back to DCS after 5 months. I am shocked how much I have forgotten, and how much muscle memory on HOTAS nees to be refreshed. It is 'painfull'. I wonder if real pilots go through that with type re-familirization after absence?

What agreement has broken between ED and RAZBAM.

I own Mirage ,Harrier II, and S.Atl. I am planning on getting F-15E + F-4E(maybe). Are these all at risk?

[JetJake76]

I think we are lucky it was just the G-limiter broken after that update. I don't want my Mirage 2000 to stop working at all. We had many adventures together, like this one:

 

Edited June 6, 2024 by JetJake76

[ricktoberfest]

11 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

'I wonder if real pilots go through that with type re-familirization after absence?

What agreement has broken between ED and RAZBAM.

I own Mirage ,Harrier II, and S.Atl. I am planning on getting F-15E + F-4E(maybe). Are these all at risk?

1. Yes it happens to real pilots too. That’s why they have rules for currency 

2. plenty of threads about current situation between razbam and ED  

I’d avoid the F-15E for now until it gets cleared up but you have to make up your own mind.  Just be aware that Razbam aircraft are currently unsupported and will get no fixes or improvements until the situation is resolved.

 

[mikko.1842]

23 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

I guess I am welcome at the party, to which I am late to. 

Sure you are welcome. What I meant is this topic had been addressed in several M-2000C bug reports topics.

 

23 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

What agreement has broken between ED and RAZBAM.

Answered in one of your other topics already.

 

23 hours ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

I own Mirage ,Harrier II, and S.Atl. I am planning on getting F-15E + F-4E(maybe). Are these all at risk?

F-15E is at risk, as any of Razbam's modules. Some customers asked for a refund and got it already. I would not advise you to invest in F-15E, knowing the current situation between ED and RB.

[JetJake76]

11 hours ago, mikko.1842 said:

F-15E is at risk, as any of Razbam's modules. Some customers asked for a refund and got it already. I would not advise you to invest in F-15E, knowing the current situation between ED and RB.

As for me, I don't want refunds, I will keep my RAZBAM planes on disk. I think for now, all efforts should be focused on keeping these modules compatible with DCS core. To prevent the situation when future DCS updates will make them unflyable.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

On 6/6/2024 at 3:39 PM, JetJake76 said:

I think we are lucky it was just the G-limiter broken after that update. I don't want my Mirage 2000 to stop working at all. We had many adventures together, like this one:

 

 

To me the loss of rudder YAW and NWS steering authority at landing and take off between 40 and 100 knots ground speed is far far  more serious issue. This manifests itself with vengeance at Nellis 21 RWY. But its present every where. In PG in Al Dharha the runway is long enough so I can nose up for a long time, and not use drag chute. By the time nosewheel comes down there is some sort of steering control.

[DmitriKozlowsky]

On 6/7/2024 at 3:43 PM, JetJake76 said:

As for me, I don't want refunds, I will keep my RAZBAM planes on disk. I think for now, all efforts should be focused on keeping these modules compatible with DCS core. To prevent the situation when future DCS updates will make them unflyable.

To be fair and balanced, neither RAZBAM nor ED owes refunds to holders of Mirage or Harrier or any mod licences. Except F-15E which is brand new. Software does become dated and goes into legacy mode. Some softeae demises are due to disputes. Software is bought as is, and it is a licence to use, not a hard product. I enjoy ('ed) Mirage. I got it on sale some years back for $25 and it was a great buy. If Mirage suppourt goes away and it becomes unusable with future DCS, that will be unfortunate, I will be sad, angry with RAZBAM and DCS, but won't be owed any money. Thats just how it is in software world.

Autodesk bought Softimage XSI from Microsoft, which bought out Softimage. Then in 2016-2017 Softimage XSI was made legacy, many of its features rolled into Autodesk Maya and 3D Studio MAX. As expected, Softimage community was livid. Lawsuits were threatened, endless open letters written, yada....yada.... Autodesk gave two years heads up to XSI community that development had stopped and software would be discontinued. Annual licences were honored, and legacy holders of permanent seats were offered transitions to Maya or 3DS MAX. 

Point is with software, user buys a licence, not the product itself. Software is a service.

[curioso007]

"To be fair and balanced, neither RAZBAM nor ED owes refunds to holders of Mirage or Harrier or any mod licences. Except F-15E which is brand new. Software does become dated and goes into legacy mode. Some softeae demises are due to disputes. "

If that is so, then ED must clearly indicate how long the use of the modules will last, so that when knowing this, we can think about whether we buy it or not, for example, the F4, how long can we fly it without it expiring? It would be very interesting to know the answer to this question, especially now that it is the new success

Greetings.

 

[DmitriKozlowsky]

6 hours ago, curioso007 said:

"To be fair and balanced, neither RAZBAM nor ED owes refunds to holders of Mirage or Harrier or any mod licences. Except F-15E which is brand new. Software does become dated and goes into legacy mode. Some softeae demises are due to disputes. "

If that is so, then ED must clearly indicate how long the use of the modules will last, so that when knowing this, we can think about whether we buy it or not, for example, the F4, how long can we fly it without it expiring? It would be very interesting to know the answer to this question, especially now that it is the new success

Greetings.

 

At least two years of updates. Then at least 6 month warning that development will be stopped and eventually software would be legacy.

[Boosterdog]

On 6/14/2024 at 1:10 PM, DmitriKozlowsky said:

To be fair and balanced, neither RAZBAM nor ED owes refunds to holders of Mirage or Harrier or any mod licences.

Is there anything to suggest ED doesnt have the files required to fix stuff for these two modules post VEAO?  I though only the F15E was subject to a custody battle?

[mikko.1842]

14 hours ago, Boosterdog said:

Is there anything to suggest ED doesnt have the files required to fix stuff for these two modules post VEAO?  I though only the F15E was subject to a custody battle?

Even if ED had access to "all the files required", it is not easy to fix things when you don't know how/why codes were written by someone else. Just saying.

Which could lead to "Yes, we do have all the files... but fixing [insert 3rd party module name] is not on our top priority list. Thank you for your understanding and for your passion."

[Boosterdog]

2 minutes ago, mikko.1842 said:

Even if ED had access to "all the files required", it is not easy to fix things when you don't know how/why codes were written by someone else. Just saying.

Which could lead to "Yes, we do have all the files... but fixing [insert 3rd party module name] is not on our top priority list. Thank you for your understanding and for your passion."

That, I suspect, would be a very likely response given it cuts the legs off any refund argument whilst placing a fix in a "to do but not abandoned" wait list.  Of course that would make the post VEAO assurances of product maintenance not worth much of the paper they were written on but hey ho.