waiting for resolution ED/RAZBAM Situation Info & Discussion

[Dangerzone]

Wow - this thread almost made a week with no responses. NL and BN must have enjoyed a break.  Is 6 days the new 'high score'?  

One thing I found interesting though. I bought the AV-8B. Really enjoyed it. I heard a lot of bad stuff about it, but I'm guessing I came on 'late' when it had matured. When the F15-E was announced, many predicted disaster with it being in the hands of RB. I was one of those that thought they were naysayers and were holding a grudge about something no longer relevant. I enjoyed the AV8B, and FWIW - I thought the F15E was coming along nicely as well. Such a pity that things didn't work out - as it looked like RB were actually kicking goals and developing a product that was loved and enjoyed by many during it's early access.

[Esac_mirmidon]

And you cant just imagine the things that would have comming for RB modules that were in development.

Things that could be a first in DCS, like STOVL, TFR Radar and Syntetic Ground Mapping, GCI link for Mírage, were.

All lost. Like the modules will be in the future.

Just so sad.

[Ronin14]

All RB breakthroughs, you sure?

[Horns]

3 hours ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

And you cant just imagine the things that would have comming for RB modules that were in development.

Things that could be a first in DCS, like STOVL, TFR Radar and Syntetic Ground Mapping, GCI link for Mírage, were.

All lost. Like the modules will be in the future.

Just so sad.

We do already have STOVL in the Harrier, although I will give Razbam credit for introducing that. TFR too, but isn't that in the F-15E? Re SAR and ground mapping, does the Hornet not already have that?

Edit: When I first posted this I wrongly said that it was Heatblur (HB) who introduced the STOVL in the Harrier, I meant Razbam. I edited my post to make sure it didn't mislead anyone.

Edited Friday at 02:05 PM by Horns
Correction

[Esac_mirmidon]

Thats why i ´ve said FIRST introduced

STVOL is first introduced by RB with the Harrier

Ground Mapping Radar with Syntetic aperture, first from RB with the Strike Eagle

GCI Link Ground To Fighter with Mirage 2000, first from RB

Terrain Following Radar coupled with the AFCS, first from RB

Everything will get lost. No hope. Sounds as sad as it is.

[draconus]

11 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

Everything will get lost.

Why so sure? It still works and will work.

[Griefhard]

5 minutes ago, draconus said:

... and will work.

That actually remains to be seen. If no one maintains the modules with upcoming DCS World versions, the may deteriorate to a point when they will not work at all any more. I expect this to happen sooner or later.

Edited Friday at 02:33 PM by Griefhard

[Horns]

23 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

Thats why i ´ve said FIRST introduced

STVOL is first introduced by RB with the Harrier

Ground Mapping Radar with Syntetic aperture, first from RB with the Strike Eagle

GCI Link Ground To Fighter with Mirage 2000, first from RB

Terrain Following Radar coupled with the AFCS, first from RB

Everything will get lost. No hope. Sounds as sad as it is.

The F-15E wasn't even out when the Hornet introduced ground mapping with SAR, so they can't claim that one. When you said "would have comming for RB modules that were in development" I didn't realize you were talking about features already implemented, but I do agree that it would be sad if we lost those features. The GCI link for the M2K would have been good, hopefully the MiG-29 brings a good implementation of GCI and perhaps it will open a door for other modules.

Edited Friday at 02:39 PM by Horns
Formatting

[Esac_mirmidon]

Ground Mapping Radar with syntetic image came first with the Eagle. The processed image to work with it.

Basic Ground mapping is another thing.

About that RB modules will be lost with time and DCS updates in the future is just my oppinion, but nothing i´ve read, two years after, from different sources, here and there are pointing me to a different outcome. I can be totally wrong

Remember ED doesnt have any code from RB modules or any other third party to keep them compatible with DCS in the future (just search for Dzen staments in the russian forums)

They can keep DCS code compatible, not breaking RB modules. For how long?

Edited Friday at 02:54 PM by Esac_mirmidon

[Czar66]

23 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

Ground Mapping Radar with syntetic image came first with the Eagle. The processed image to work with it.

Quick dumb question. How's is that different to the Hornet's and Viper's?

[Esac_mirmidon]

At first release ? light years ahead of everything DCS had. When the Strke Eagle was released, the High Resolution synthetic aperture image was a first in this category

Now with 2+ years of development, the gap streched, yes. But the things you can do with the ground mapping radar image with the Strike Eagle is not comparable with anything on the Hornet or Viper. Just compare the image and resolution the APG-70 can do and is modelled with any Hornet or Viper image.

[Mike Force Team]

As we see the dispute's progress, it looks like payment or resolution will not happen for quite some time.

[Esac_mirmidon]

We are close to two years now, 2 years of possible development halted. Imagine what things could came in two years

Edited Friday at 03:28 PM by Esac_mirmidon

[Czar66]

10 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

At first release ? light years ahead of everything DCS had. When the Strke Eagle was released, the High Resolution synthetic aperture image was a first in this category

Now with 2+ years of development, the gap streched, yes. But the things you can do with the ground mapping radar image with the Strike Eagle is not comparable with anything on the Hornet or Viper. Just compare the image and resolution the APG-70 can do and is modelled with any Hornet or Viper image.

I don't understand. Is it solely on the resolution side?

[Esac_mirmidon]

Just compare the Ground Mapping Radar of the Strike Eagle on release and the Hornet or Viper at the same time the Eagle was released. 

Thats why im talking about FIRST in the category. If you know well the Strike Eagle you can tell the difference

Edited Friday at 03:42 PM by Esac_mirmidon

[Czar66]

3 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

Just compare the Ground Mapping Radar of the Strike Eagle on release and the Hornet or Viper at the same time the Eagle was released. 

Thats why im talking about FIRST in the category. If you know well the Strike Eagle you can tell the difference

Ok. So it is about resolution. So the SE wasn't the first.

[Esac_mirmidon]

First SAR Ground Mapping Radar, it was the FIRST Synthetic Aperture Ground Mapping Radar in DCS. Thats what im writing

Hornets and Vipers are Doppler Ground Maping Radars in DCS, not SAR. The difference is huge not only on resolution.

Edited Friday at 03:56 PM by Esac_mirmidon

[Czar66]

12 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

First SAR Ground Mapping Radar, it was the FIRST Synthetic Aperture Ground Mapping Radar in DCS. Thats what im writing

Hornets and Vipers are Doppler Ground Maping Radars in DCS, not SAR. The difference is huge not only on resolution.

Now that's the answer. Thanks!

[Esac_mirmidon]

Welcomed , mate

[ChuckJäger]

absolutely a change in resolution.  It is actually wild to see in the module - it's kind of a game changer for me.  I loved that.

The other thing the strike eagle did that I don't know that I've seen elsewhere was the recorded Target Pod.  That module had so much promise - my only hope is that RB and ED figure this out, or at the very least - figure out a way for them to go their separate ways and allow ED to continue on with RB IP.   I think the latter is a long shot at best though.

[Griefhard]

3 hours ago, ChuckJäger said:

a long shot at best though.

2 years with no positiv outlook and on top of that a stop in sales? That does not sound promising at all. It sounds like: "He's dead, Jim!"

[Horns]

5 hours ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

First SAR Ground Mapping Radar, it was the FIRST Synthetic Aperture Ground Mapping Radar in DCS. Thats what im writing

Hornets and Vipers are Doppler Ground Maping Radars in DCS, not SAR. The difference is huge not only on resolution.

Hornet manual (page 193) does state EXP3 mode is SAR, so not sure who's right on that...

[Esac_mirmidon]

Hornet EXP3 SA is way more limited and again, im talking about FIRST introduction of a SAR Ground Mapping Radar, not a submode on a Doppler base radar

[Horns]

21 minutes ago, Esac_mirmidon said:

Hornet EXP3 SA is way more limited and again, im talking about FIRST introduction of a SAR Ground Mapping Radar, not a submode on a Doppler base radar

Ok, I'm not here to argue so I'll leave it. Either way, the mudhen's a/g radar certainly turns out a good clear image. Here's hoping it stays in the game.

[Dangerzone]

10 hours ago, draconus said:

Why so sure? It still works and will work.

You're more optimistic than me. When ED can't even keep their own modules from having repeated issues (scoreboard, ground unit pathing, track replay desync, etc where they have all the source code and can work on it from all angles - it seems more plausible that sooner or later there's going to be a change they make that's going to change something that breaks the F15E in a similar way too - but without the F15's source code to be able to diagnose from all angles - well, as I said - if they struggle when they do have it, this can only make it far more difficult. (This isn't a go at ED with their bugs - but just to point out that if it's so involved when you have the source code, it's going to be far harder without)

10 hours ago, Griefhard said:

That actually remains to be seen. If no one maintains the modules with upcoming DCS World versions, the may deteriorate to a point when they will not work at all any more. I expect this to happen sooner or later.

Agreed. I see only 2 ways that the F15E survives this. Either Razbam and ED come back to a mutually beneficial arrangement, or somewhere in the contract it's stipulated that ED must get a copy of the source code and the legal proceedings end up forcing Razbam to hand it over. Otherwise, without developers actively maintaining the source code - it would be a very hard ask to expect this to remain operational long term.