AV-8B Harrier Plus DCS version

[WildBillKelsoe]

I certainly hope so. I really now covet the harrier. I think of it as a faster, more maneuverable A-10C.

[Prowler111]

Why don't you tell them the truth?

 

Guys you are totally right, u haven't heared news for some weeks now, so the project is cancelled, no need to check back ever again,

 

And you´re totally wrong, the project is not cancelled, it´s pretty much alive, but there is so much we simply can´t say in the open..

 

Prowler

[badger66]

I certainly hope so. I really now covet the harrier. I think of it as a faster, more maneuverable A-10C.

 

With a lot smaller payload and range !!! :thumbup:

[SGT Coyle]

but there is so much we simply can´t say in the open.

 

Prowler111, what can't you say in the open? Not specifically, but to shed more light on the process. What is the big deal?

[joey45]

Most of it is code

AFM

Augs for the added nuzzles

Systems

Rum and Coke

Sub systems

and everything else that needs to be implemented...

Edited August 13, 2013 by joey45

[Vampyre]

With a lot smaller payload and range !!! :thumbup:

 

And due to the small wing, it's turn radius isn't that great either. Pretty much any dedicated jet fighter will eat a harrier for breakfast.

[Prowler111]

Prowler111, what can't you say in the open? Not specifically, but to shed more light on the process. What is the big deal?

Ok, here it goes, there are some things we can control, and some we definitely can´t. We have to go at both paces, eventually both "lines" will get together and this aircraft will be in YOUR rig.It does not means we stopped developing it, it means it reached as far as currently, can go.So we took the decision to start with less complicated aircraft and move forward, that way, we can have a steady flow of products, at the level we decided (AFM´s there is no other option from us, and of course A-10 DCS) until everything gets together.So,there will be a Harrier (GR´s and AV-8B) in DCS from us? YES, in due time, and this applies to the F-15E Strike Eagle as well.Like i once said, mesh work? that´s just the tip of the iceberg, and to be honest, anyone with some degree of 3d studio max knowledge (and the proper tools) can put anything in DCS.Now,make it functional, that´s a whole another story, so having said that, this is the way we are moving within our products, incremental developments. F-15E and Harrier mesh work is already there. There is no point on posting pictures of stuff that will not be in the sim until some other developments happen.We are about to finish a T-2, and we are already working in a Mirage2000C and there a T-6 TexanII is also being worked on.These are what you´ll get in the short/medium term from us.

Best regards

Prowler

[WildBillKelsoe]

any fix for the brick wall thingy?? I got FSX II plus on 30 May 2013, so that is the Mk-2? this is the file name I downloaded (one file only)

setup_razbam_AV8B_vol1_FSX

 

and this is the installation screen:

 

Is this the one without the brick wall (sudden transition flip?)

 

Be advised I have A2A's P-51D, VRS Superbug and would this in anyway affect the Harrier installation and physics?

 

I keep nosing over when I land even at full throttle padding the gears. Is this normal? I'll try changing CoG to aft maybe get different result?

Edited August 16, 2013 by WildBillKelsoe

[Cedaway]

...

...

...We are about to finish a T-2, and we are already working in a Mirage2000C and there a T-6 TexanII is also being worked on.These are what you´ll get in the short/medium term from us.

Best regards

Prowler

 

Thanks for this. This honesty is very appreciated. :thumbup:

The way to go incrementally in complexity is wise. Keep it good.

Oh, and for the Mirage 2000C => :bounce::bounce::bounce: Hope you can get enough information about it. The french are not reputed to reveal easily their defense tech.

[CypherGrunyev]

Progress so far looks amazing.

Can't wait to VTOL...

[Lord_Pyro]

Mirage :)

I guess many of us had the ADA Mod installed just to fly these beautifull planes. But now one with a proper FM, Cockpit and Weapons is on its way? Awesome, this will add a new taste to some missions!

[SUBS17]

We are about to finish a T-2, and we are already working in a Mirage2000C and there a T-6 TexanII is also being worked on.These are what you´ll get in the short/medium term from us.

Best regards

Prowler

 

Those sound awesome, I'll be getting those.:thumbup:

[WildBillKelsoe]

At this point I can say with extreme prejudice that the model developed for FSX is crap. Transitioning from level flight to a hover occurs funny with airspeed reaching 95 kts. The MPCD is not working and the download links on their site with my account have expired. I mailed Larry and got no reply as of 10 days ago. He mentioned something about a fix to the non working MPCD and in the mk-2 update presumably eliminated the transition over representation, which he didn't, unless I purchased the mk-1 on May 2013, which presumably is a time after mk-2 update release.. Not happy with the attitude and neglect to the FSX harrier model. :(

[rjetster1]

At this point I can say with extreme prejudice that the model developed for FSX is crap. Transitioning from level flight to a hover occurs funny with airspeed reaching 95 kts. The MPCD is not working and the download links on their site with my account have expired. I mailed Larry and got no reply as of 10 days ago. He mentioned something about a fix to the non working MPCD and in the mk-2 update presumably eliminated the transition over representation, which he didn't, unless I purchased the mk-1 on May 2013, which presumably is a time after mk-2 update release.. Not happy with the attitude and neglect to the FSX harrier model. :(

 

Shouldn’t you be taking this matter up on the FSX boards…? I don’t want to read the problems you are having with FSX, rather the ongoing progression of the DCS version Harrier.

[Grim_Smiles]

Shouldn’t you be taking this matter up on the FSX boards…? I don’t want to read the problems you are having with FSX, rather the ongoing progression of the DCS version Harrier.

 

I took it as him voicing his concerns for the DCS version based on his experience with the FSX version. I could be wrong of course, but that's how I read it.

[rjetster1]

I read no mention of trepidations with DCS, but rather his unsuccessful experience relating to FSX. They are both distinct platforms.

[Flying Penguin]

But with the same developer behind each, and with a developer as small as this, it is a legitimate concern to ask whether, if they are bringing their B game to FSX, they can bring their A game to DCS? It is probably the same people on both projects....

 

I don't know the truth of the matter but it's a legitimate concern.

[WildBillKelsoe]

Shouldn’t you be taking this matter up on the FSX boards…? I don’t want to read the problems you are having with FSX, rather the ongoing progression of the DCS version Harrier.

 

I took it up on their forums and got no response, and I'm voicing my concerns for DCS as well. I hope not the same physics are what to expect in DCS.:thumbup:

 

After a bit of searching on the problem, he says he fixed it, but this video on after the update confers otherwise, as well as my experience.

 

 

I also purchased it on 30 May 2013, so I don't know if I purchased the update or a mis-named AV-8B II plus. Here is 'fix' post for the transition behaviour

 

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1539526&postcount=62

 

yet I see no tangible change really. I'm sorry if I troubled you but this is the very essence of the Harrier and why we love it and want it in DCS.

 

I'll download SSW Harrier and see if it suffers the same problem with transitions. If so, then its an FSX fault and all is clear. If not, clearly something wrong with script (last I checked they use a C++ script)

Edited August 23, 2013 by WildBillKelsoe

[Blaze]

If not, clearly something wrong with script (last I checked they use a C++ script)

 

It is FSX's fault. The sim wasn't designed to handle complex flight dynamics like VTOL. You can only go so far to get it to look kind of right, but it's never ideal. Don't blame Razbam, it's the limitations of the platform. It can't and never has done well with high-performance aircraft, VTOL, thrust vectoring...anything extreme. Only way for developers to work around it is to write their own flight control program to bypass the sim's (similar to what VRS is doing).

 

EDIT:

.....and I'm voicing my concerns for DCS as well. I hope not the same physics are what to expect in DCS.:thumbup:

 

On the subject of DCS, our development team has (on the side) messed with VTOL capability of a jet aircraft using an external flight model, and it worked absolutely brilliantly. Just as you'd expect a real VTOL aircraft to perform. Thing is, there is no limit to what flight model you want to make in DCS - it's an un-restricted platform. It's all up to the developer how detailed they want to make the flight dynamics.

Edited August 24, 2013 by Blaze

[WildBillKelsoe]

It is FSX's fault. The sim wasn't designed to handle complex flight dynamics like VTOL. You can only go so far to get it to look kind of right, but it's never ideal. Don't blame Razbam, it's the limitations of the platform. It can't and never has done well with high-performance aircraft, VTOL, thrust vectoring...anything extreme. Only way for developers to work around it is to write their own flight control program to bypass the sim's (similar to what VRS is doing).

 

EDIT:

 

On the subject of DCS, our development team has (on the side) messed with VTOL capability of a jet aircraft using an external flight model, and it worked absolutely brilliantly. Just as you'd expect a real VTOL aircraft to perform. Thing is, there is no limit to what flight model you want to make in DCS - it's an un-restricted platform. It's all up to the developer how detailed they want to make the flight dynamics.

 

OK, it looks like its FSX's fault alright.. The demo by SSW proves the same handling, although they have a dark but working MPCD in my FSX standard SP2 version.

 

OK, answer me this:

 

What is the cause in your opinion for some aircrafts not to display the MPCD?

I have VRS and the MPCD's work perfectly in my standard version (non acceleration).

 

I can live with FSX's limitations, but its gotta be something on your end when it comes to MPCD. I appreciate the effort you guys did, but I suggest you release a second patch to address the MPCD issue. My 2 cents.

[Biggles07]

OK, it looks like its FSX's fault alright.. The demo by SSW proves the same handling, although they have a dark but working MPCD in my FSX standard SP2 version.

 

OK, answer me this:

 

What is the cause in your opinion for some aircrafts not to display the MPCD?

I have VRS and the MPCD's work perfectly in my standard version (non acceleration).

 

I can live with FSX's limitations, but its gotta be something on your end when it comes to MPCD. I appreciate the effort you guys did, but I suggest you release a second patch to address the MPCD issue. My 2 cents.

 

Bill, AFAIK Blaze is not a Razbam employee and is not speaking on their behalf, I believe he is trying to give the perspective of a "fellow developer" and convey the challenges and difficulties in achieving flight model fidelity within FSX in his post. For what its worth, a friend has the Razbam AV-8B+ and he is not much enamoured with it either. As pointed out though, DCS is a very different kettle of fish and one would hope that far more will be achieved in terms of V/STOL accuracy etc.

 

I would strongly urge Razbam to put a great deal of effort into this, if its good and up to snuff it will sell like hotcakes. :)

 

Cheers. :)

Edited August 24, 2013 by Biggles07

[Zeus67]

I feel compelled to reply here since WildBillKelsoe decided to comment about a FSX product on a DCS forum.

 

1. VTOL: FSX does not support vectorial thrust. Period. That's it. In order to mimic vectorial thrust a developer is forced to create workarounds that create conflicts with the sim engine. It is a trade-off and cannot be avoided. I'm sorry if you don't like our answer to the vectorial thrust in FSX. In my very biased opinion, my answer to the vectorial thrust problem is the one that gives you "real" vectorial thrust since I am using actual engine thrust as opposed to the SSW solution that tweaks an invisible flap drag/lift coefficient to generate lift. Is it optimal? No. But then FSX unlike DCS does not allow for the use of an external flight model which would have allowed me to use a real vectorial thrust model. SSW solution works too but in my opinion is the least "real" of the available ones and that is why I didn't use it.

2. Dark MPDs: There is a bug in the MPDs. A your run of the mill syntax error in a gague with over 8000 lines and no compiler/syntax checker. The error is so minor that 99% of the times the gauge is loaded without problem. In your case it seems that the gauge is not loading because of this error an thus you get a dark screen. It took me a long time to find just what kind of error and to track the offending line. I haven't been able to fix it because it is just me doing all the coding work at RAZBAM and I have other stuff in my in tray. Including the T-2 for DCS. So I have to time share between projects and for me that is a killing proposition since I have to switch gears and problems.

 

I'm sorry that your experience has not been what you wanted, but we are aware of the problems and will fix it ASAP. As for the VTOL thing, I can't help it. You are welcome to try other people's products if you are not satisfied with ours.

 

As for the DCS Harrier, it is forthcoming but I cannot give a schedule.

[Max200012]

Anything going on with this?