Title says it all. The Hawk was such a disappointment I may never buy another DCS plane again. Certainly won't be buying another VEAO product. Why? The subpar quality. The view panning isn't mapped. How lazy can the devs be? ED should force 3rd party devs to have consistent function, like view panning, across all modules. And it does not seem like there is anyway to map it to my HOTAS either. So I must use the number pad to pan around which is very clunky. I don't have a Track IR and don't plan on buying one so that is out of the question.

The lack of documentation is horrid. Two tutorial missions, none of which cover weapons systems. Even the ramp start tutorial can't seem to complete. I had to watch a youtube video to proceed.

Low res cockpit textures. Pales in comparison to FC3 or the MIG-21.

Really disappointed that ED is allowing such unpolished crap to be released to DCS World. It makes me very worried and very unlikely to spend money, especially when the planes aren't interesting to me. Thought I would support a 3rd party dev team but I think I won't bother anymore.

Even for a beta, this rather absurd. I guess I'll keep hopelessly waiting on more FC3 level planes of interest, F-16s, ect. Not doing to spend 3-5 hours figuring out how to map view functions to a boring trainer plane I might never play again. Forget about learning to fly the damn thing; I'm doing work the lazy devs should have done in the first place...

And then people wonder why flight sims are a niche genre. The devs don't make it easy to support them.

I'd ask for a refund...

I've never bought a trainer aircraft and have no intention of doing so... certainly I'd never buy one just to 'support a genre' either.

Learnt long ago that it just seems the more money you throw at a dev team just to support them, (many, many people do this and lots of firms jump onto that bandwagon) the more unfinished products end up on the market... end result, unhappy customers.

While I understand and share your overall frustrations with the Hawk, I wouldn't hold it's shortcomings against other products. Veao is quickly starting to look like an over-promise/under deliver developer, but there are other bright spots on the horizon.

The current (third party) golden child for DCS is the Mig 21. A solid product all around that really nails the feeling of flying cold-war red iron. Give that a shot before writing of DCS level birds.

I'm starting to lean towards this train of thought.

At this point, I'm willing to support devs pre-beta if they have already delivered an excellent product and have a proven track record (eg. Leatherneck and the Mig), or if they've proven themselves on another platform AND they are developing an exciting product. For example, if VRS was developing a super bug for DCS, I'd pre-order that today.

As far as trainers go btw, I'd love if we could get something a bit different than transitional jets. I'd love to fly a T-38 or T-6 (the latter setup as an AT-6 would be fun).

A T-38 would be great!

I was never impressed by what I saw of the quality of the VEAO Hawk.

A well done Goshawk would be fun, especially with the tailhook aircraft on the way, but I never had the motivation to pick up the Hawk.

I'll echo the others in saying don't let your experience with it sour your view of other DCS products, whether by ED or other third parties like Leatherneck.

Hmmm.
I put this Hawk aircraft into The Highway mission a couple of days ago, after messing with it as an AI plane in another mission I'm developing. It does have guns and rockets, and 'winders. I'm looking forward to flying my A-10C and being in the same airspace as a Hawk, to see what it flies like and how it survives before I make a purchase.

So I read this thread and was disappointed to hear about the complaints. But over in DCS Forums VEAO, most everyone had good things to say about the flight model and cockpit.
http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=143911
(There is an old adage that you shouldn't ask a man about a horse right after he bought it.)


I will say that I would not fly any aircraft without the TrackIR; I would miss it severely.

WC

I bought it and I can echo that currently it's massively unimpressive. I'm sure that this will change for the better eventually, but it does drive home the message about early releases, especially when it's trainers; Even when they're finished they can't do 5% of what e.g. the A-10C can do, so by releasing it in the earliest stage anyone's ever released a module, I think they got off to a bad start.

Personally though I think even when it's finished, I won't bother with more trainers. The trainer aircraft only differ from any other module in that it flies differently, looks differently, and is literally speaking built to be able to do nothing else than the extreme basics of flying that any other plane has. As a customer, I don't understand why I should pay as much money (or for the C-101, even more) as for the A-10C.

I was severely underwhelmed by the Hawk, not just the quality but the LONG delay especially after the devs said it was 'ready" for release almost a year before it was released and they were only held up by legal issues. That should have meant a huge leap in quality while they waited for the legal issues to be sorted out but alas that didn't happen. And here we are at near the end of june and still no AFM and also the devs is 'late' on a couple of its other projects as well. YES YES , I know they didn't give release dates but they did give release windows on their roadmap. The P40 seems to be way behind as they only only now getting the damage model and pilot model done.

Personally I think VEAO spends too much time getting ready for airshows.

So, to rank those who have released modules in order of quality greatest to least:

ED (naturally, granting that some are not as great as others)
LN
BST (can a brotha have an update and/or manual?)
VEAO



The Jedi Master

I too share in some disappointment with the Hawk and C-101, and unfortunately the lack of key/button mapping ability spoils some of the other available features. Heck, the flight director in the C-101 is screaming to be mapped to a numeric keypad, and it frustrates me that there are no iCommands for it yet. That, a lack of communications menu, and the inability to trim; I added a TARGET based trimmer to my profile as a workaround for this.

In fairness to VEAO (and Aviodev for that matter, because the C-101 currently has the exact same shortcomings as the Hawk), we don't know how much of the shortcomings are due to the upcoming 2.0 release and the need to build for two platforms as a result of 2.0's delay. Once VEAO got through it's legal issues with BAE, the Hawk was supposed to be released concurrent with 2.0, then they released with 1.2.xx when it was apparent that 2.0 would miss the December 2014 mark. Granted, the MiG-21 was also supposed to be released with 2.0, but it was also in development for 1.2.xx for quite some time so they already had a mature code base.

I can't in good conscience recommend either the Hawk or C-101 in their current state, but I also don't intent to pass judgment until the aircraft are out of beta. One thing is for sure: this just makes the quality of the MiG-21 (as a first effort of a 3rd party developer) that much more impressive.

Actually I would put LN ahead of ED is terms of quality.

it is a pity that my one and only interaction with one of LN'crew put me off so much.

Just a few things to mention the VEAO Hawk has 2 versions the first one is EFM the 2nd has PFM. The other thing is you should be able to map your view commands in the setup for DCS. VEAOs plans are to setup a realistic pilot training program with real Hawk pilots involved in setting up this course:

All aircraft will be developed with full ASM and EFM to PFM standards (PFM where we can get them to that level).

DCS Air Force Training Pack
BAE Hawk T.1A – October 2014 Released
Short Tucano
Grob G115E Tutor
Pilatus Pc21

DCS Warbirds Collection
Curtiss P-40F - Q2 2015 *
Grumman F8F Bearcat – Q2 2015 *
Supermarine Spitfire Mk XIV – Q3 2015 *
HA-1112 Buchon - Q3 2015 *
Hawker Typhoon
Grumman Wildcat - Q4 2015
Dehaviland Mosquito Mk IV
Dehaviland Mosquito Mk XVI
Messerchmitt Me109T
Supermarine Seafire 17
Hawker Sea Hurricane
Hawker Sea Hawk
Curtiss Hawk 75
Curtiss P-40C
Focke Wulf FW190A-8 / F-8
Messerschmitt Bf109-E4
North American A-36 Apache

DCS Royal Air Force Battle of Britain Memorial Flight (RAFBBMF)
We are currently in discussion with them to develop the pack and an announcement will be made soon.
Avro Lancaster
Douglas C-47 Dakota
Hawker Hurricane MkI
Hawker Hurricane MkIIb
Various Supermarine Spitfire’s in their collection

DCS Jets
Eurofighter Typhoon – 2015 *
Airbus A330 MRTT Refueller – Included with the Typhoon as AI then developed ASM/EFM after to be sold separately.
SAAB JAS Gripen
Dassault Rafale
Hunter Hawker
Dehaviland Venom
Dehaviland Vampire
Panavia Tornado GR1
Hawker Siddley FAS1 SeaHarrier
Gloster Meteor
English Electric Lightning

DCS Helicopters
Westland Lynx
Westland Wessex
Boeing CH-47 Chinook
Aerospatial Puma

Map Areas
Duxford (test development map)
North Africa – Tubruq
Mach Loop – Welsh Valleys
Falkland Islands

So the Hawk has quite an interesting evolution ahead of it because not only is it a trainer but once ED releases the L39 with the 2 seat mp capability then the Hawk and C101 will eventually have this capability. The training pack is based on the RAF training program so I would expect it to be similar in nature to Sabres A-10C missions where at the end you graduate with a lot of experience gained in how to fly fighter aircraft very similar to how real pilots fly the real aircraft. The end result is you will learn a lot and be able to fly missions a lot better especially if you have emergencys etc that's when such training comes into play. With regard complaints, go to the ED forums and complain there nicely and I'm sure the VEAO devs will help you out.(they are a good bunch)
http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=207

BTW my advice is keep the Hawk and be patient as these guys will no doubt continue to improve on the Hawk over time.

Don't be put off to much they are making an F-14 for DCS.

I would echo that same sentiment, very low quality and very unfinished
+1 buyers remorse

I think my OP sounded a bit too harsh after reviewing it, but I do feel it was released prematurely. We need more tutorials for the plane if they're going for the study sim level even if it is in beta. I am just growing a little tired of constant beta & Early Access titles. Its one thing to release it a few months before the final version, but it seems like this will be in beta for 6 or more months.

And maybe I am spoiled by the MIG-21, which set the bar really high.

Have to say I completely agree with Flogger23m....and I bought it on sale!

Just a half arsed effort IMO.

Avoid

BULL

I can hear VEAO's response now: ". . . specifically stated product is in BETA state."

Why do people buy beta? You're not finished with the product yet? Here, have some money! Still got some major bugs to squish? Take my money! If I had my way, it'd be illegal to charge for anything in beta state.

Which brings me to my next point: perma-beta . . . the unforeseen consequence of the internet.

Am sorry to hear about your bad experience; live and learn I guess. Anyway, wake me up when ED finally releases F-18.