Again RAZBAM did it. Earlier (again, like before) they adjusted M-2000C flight model, I don't even know how many times they have done that.. Everytime it's correct, yet they keep changing it. All players were like yea, now it's good and realistic and the ones who complained got crap thrown at them and they obviously were wrong as always..
I really thought RAZBAM could get their crap together, but after all this time the hope truly is lost, they clearly have no idea what they're doing. If you have it try the wonder and see how it flys, and then compare it to any of the other planes, which aren't perfect of course but at least you get some sense of flying instead driving a train on rails. Let see.. they managed to ruin skins, spec maps, radar, autopilot, cockpit textures, cockpit trackIR and the list goes on.... I wonder when they attack Harrier.. probably when they start selling their next module, the moment which we probably see in near future. This is the company which even changed how your joystick works in game. 'nuff said.

Oh almost forgot, again trying to change the controls leads to BSOD as before, and it was fixed before... and you know the rest.....

Are you saying ED's flight modelling isn't accurate? Surely you jest!!

He is talking about Razbam. No mention of ED in his entire post.

Maybe you have ruined your install. I just checked my Mirage. Yes my track ir works fine, skins seems fine, cockpit textures are fine, radar detect targets and can guide missile to target, autopilot works fine. I don't know what maps you meant but at least kneeboard maps works.

It doesn't work that way. FMs are built by the team building the aircraft using their own data. DCS provides the air, the aircraft builder defines how the aircraft flies in that air.

Fair enough, I stand corrected

Music anyone?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRzq6PK5MnY&feature=youtu.be

This represents the biggest flaw in DCS 3rd parties. Most of them do this as a part time endeavor with small teams and only rudimentary knowledge of what they are trying to model. Creating an FM becomes complicated when you move outside of the box (normal flight).

I agree, too bad they still have clear conscience to sell their stuff when knowing their own limits - they must have known that there's gonna be lots and lots of difficulties creating the stuff. And what makes it worse they don't even care to even try to fix the bugs, instead start selling another module and concentrate on that. Maybe the priority isn't afterall the love towards creating good modules and enjoying that, but something el$e.

Least there was lots of fixes in new patch (hotfix3 to 2.5) for mirage 2000


And to be fair, flight models in old sim’s often have zero spin modeling (janes F-15, janes f-18, falcon 4 ) , i find dcs flight models very enjoyable even with those bugs here and there. (Well , not with hawk ..but thats worst plane mod evere in anysim.. really fubar ..

Does ED not have to check and test for things like these? So what if the FM is built by 3rd party, don't they quality-test for stuff like this anyway?

There doesn't seem to be ANY quality control from ED, some of the 3rd party FMs are appalling. I'm sticking with ED & BST modules only in the future.

3rd parties should start small.....Cessna 152, or perhaps a sailplane.....then move up to twin engine, get that right with minimal instrumentation and progress to Jet aircraft or Helo's.....start small, gather knowledge.....Learn from VEAO.....they started with the Hawk, still a complete fail yet before it was finished Chris and his sidekick bragged about how good their Typhoon would be.,....now they are selling their crap to Dovetail's flight sim world (minus the 152 and sailplane.....so another fail from not learning from the mistakes they made under the DCS\TFC\Belsimtek banner)

3rd parties with a pipe dream come into the equation with absolutely no knowledge other than a cut and paste cockpit that looked half ok (to the developer) in FC2 and then hype them selves up to be able to release something that is always going to more wasted bandwidth to their consumers, then back themselves when 98% of the consumers seek a refund. Then they turn on ED and say that it is all their fault their pipe dream module is a POS

I agree, where was the quality control when CTD's Hornet gained 3rd party status, Kinney Interactive's doomed to fail F-35 which mind you was based on a 'gofundme' (kickstarter) page to kick it all off. Many have gained 3rd party status, many more have failed yet still have a 3rd part license.

What about the hype behind old mate WW2, He comes in, get's a 3rd party license then walks away from it all leaving ED to pay out on the kickstarter rewards......why do we have DCS WW2? because old mate gained a 3rd party license to develop WW2 aircraft, pulled the pin and ED\TFC had to warrant the kickstarter goals or face backlash and law suits.

If not for ED\TFC making piss poor judgements, there would be no DCS WW2 and more of DCS\TFC\BelSimtek developers working on modern day releases as it should have been before the lotto draw was held on 'which 3rd party developer should we take on board next'

Interesting. I almost agree, but one thing.. thing is that "3rd parties should start small.....Cessna 152, or perhaps a sailplane....." sailplanes have moving parts..

Oh forgive me, I didn't realise RAZBAM is already that far, that they have MiG-19s cockpit modeled, no wonder they didn't have time to fix mirages 20+ bugs.

A very good point you put forward. Just like DCS\TFC\Belsimtek in general.....release updates yet do not fix anything that is broken prior.....perfect example is a cold start on a moving ship....how long did that take to 'fix'

I see updates to the Argo campaign.....funny how the ship is not moving in the 1st mission of the campaign. honestly, that 1st mission spoke volumes for me as to what the whole campaign would be like so I didn't bother with any other mission.

"Build a campaign based around DCS\TFC\Belsimtek's flaws to make it work"

I can't be bothered testing let alone downloading updates but have ED\TFC\Belsimtek actually fixed the aircraft falling off ships? I read somewhere that the Harrier had that issue even with Razbams release of the wasp class. so there we go, I answered my own question.....2018 and the bug from 2012 (or perhaps earlier) is still an issue yet to be resolved

Even on 2.5, this bug is still there?

Well there's 50 bug reports with Harrier this month alone, among is the aircraft falling from deck - if we take, say 50% as false reports that still leaves couple of 'possible' faults. Actually in EDs Mirage forums, the last post should be "To be continued in Harrier section".
I wonder how anyone can even think of starting to learn the planes properly, when one doesn't even know what is working and what's not - or if it's working is it working correct or will it be someday changed so you have to learn it again, obviously different way than you already once did.
I bought a simulator module, not a testing platform and I certainly never agreed to work for devs for free.

Yes you did, when you bought the module and ED rewrote their EULA to ensure that.