I see that Razbam are making this module and as I have never owned any modules produced by them I was wondering what are they like for quality/bugs etc?

I fully agree with everyone that says that won't buy it (or any other DCS module for that matter) in a Beta stage!
Moreover, if I had to buy a "Beta AV-8B" than I would buy CAP2 instead - At least with CAP2 there's a promise of a dynamic campaign and other important (to me) gameplay features

And even more, that guy who's clearly here promoting DCS tried to come up with Falcon BMS (probably in an attempt to compared it to DCS) but either way and now that the subject of Falcon BMS came up, I also want to say that there's a quite interesting AV-8B in the Falcon BMS (with a fully functional thrust vectoring and vertical landing/takeoff configuration), specially if one considers the AV-8B+ variant.

They have a great way to engage with the community and take people along for the ride, IMHO I feel for DCS they set the benchmark for development updates and building the hype (if you're into that sort of thing).

They release modules far from complete (well to be fair in DCS they have only done the Mirage) but they indicate that fairly clearly in their manuals - so if you want the complete package stay clear of the Early Access aircraft. I personally don't mind this approach but I can understand others are frustrated by it, but the loud voices want thing now, now, now so this has become standard now.

Bugs – the Mirage had a few as was expected, though the commitment to fixing and developing the module was clearly shown. The challenge from what I see in DCS is that the fix release cycles across the two versions has slowed the release of these fixes which is incredibility frustrating to say the least but it’s not a reflection on RAZBAM. I get the sense with the Harrier that they are trying to get it nailed down in terms of quality before release, however, new features will more than likely introduce new bugs (I hate writing that – as it’s not a foregone conclusion and shouldn’t be, software QA engineering should be able to deal with this).

There has been some criticism of the state of the Mirage and that it’s not complete and that with all of the new feature releases the manual was never updated (BTW - there is a community driven update to the manual underway). Whilst I do have it, I stopped after a period of time flying it as I got distracted with another aircraft so I can’t comment on what’s not finished.

Conclusion – I like the quality of their products, I accept that it will not be a complete module at the release, I also accept that it will have bugs so am happy to proceed with the early access.

Oesau, the Spit IX is nowhere near as complicated as modern jets and it is still in 'early release' after nearly a year.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3281421#post3281421

I am surprised Sith didn't delete the post.

You can see all the work they have done on the Mirage in this thread.



Not compare, different time how developers made money, only with the development stage, if it was still a company. (We know it was updated for free, lets pretend it wasn't stolen for one minute) How long did it take to get F4 out of beta? Well I would have called F4 beta for many many many many years, the flight model wasn't right or good until BMS started to sorted it out in 2006, that's just one area of F4. Not taking away from what was accomplished back then by any means, it was still enjoyable and playable after a few mods like SuperPak..

What is the system modeling like in the AV-8B in BMS, is it much like the F16 by any chance?
Could you even call it an Alpha stage? laughable to even bring up here really.

I get frustrated with DCS, it takes time to get things done, having several military clients properly doesn't help, except with paying the bills to stay in business, which enables them to spend more dollars creating more advance technologies for more advance aircraft, for us and their military clients, F4 is not at the level the military can use for training, it was never intended to be. DCS on the other hand has a website dedicated to promoting this accurate technology.

Example Post


Are we the military technology guinea pigs? Yes and no, this could change in the future perhaps when ED doesn't have to only rely on these contracts.

What is laughable is that you insist on comparing a product that is polished by modders who do it on their free time vs. a product that is supposedly under full-time development by paid employees. Also, please review the timeline of Falcon and the timeline of ED and see why your for-free-work vs. paid-for-work is just silly.

Just in case you missed it ---- the point here is FREE vs. PAID ---- your predecessors don't seem to understand this concept. I hope you can.



Ah yes, that old excuse.... remind me again what "advance technologies" have come out recently from their military contract???

I don't compare a software product that is not in business anymore to a company that has employees and other contracts to pay for the livelihoods of said 75 employees and especially when it's a STOLEN vs. PAID product.

No comparison and I hope you can understand the way I see it.

No, not really.
But please continue, this is getting better by the post.

nope but he did lock the thread .....

Who locked what? rule 1.5 stay on topic lol, kidding.

You want to see something really laughable?? Look yourself at the mirror!

I'm here posting as a sim user and a costumer and as such this is my opinion which unlike your own opinions, it doesn't come from a DCS fanboy.

Yes, the AV-8B in BMS uses the F-16 avionics which is not that bad or far off if you're flying the AV-8B+ variant.

But then again, can you fly the AV-8B in your "beloved" DCS in a fully dynamic campaign and battlefield?? Trying to do this in DCS would be really laughable!

No more to say really, got nothin.

There is just a little difference between a digital combat "simulator" and a Stolen F4, F-16 replicants.

Just sayin.

You like pretty pictures and cool textures I guess?
How many DCS singleplayer mission have you built?
If any, did you like the AI behaviour?

Do you enjoy the missile behaviour in DCS?
Or does that fall outside pretty pictures and cool textures?

offtopic
Have you ever flown Falcon BMS campaigns?
/offtopic

Nope , but the poster then created a new post and nicely asked the question of "What information do ED need to get these features implemented" .....
and he promptly got his posting rights suspended

@ SC/JG_Oesau. Thank you for your thoughts on RAZBAM.

I want to get back into flight sims again. I've spent long enough in War Thunder and World of Planes 'flying' with mouse/keyboard,now I want to play with the big boys again

My TrackIR I bought some 12 months ago has only collected dust in that time.My Logitech joystick was thrown out about 10 months ago (spiking issues,that's 2 with the same problem) so I just purchased a Thrustmaster T.16000M that I believe uses Hall sensors. I have never owned a throttle/stick combination although I have tried one and I didn't like it. I was brought up on early Microprose titles where the keyboard ruled along with a simple flight stick.

I'm looking forward to it and hopefully the RAZBAM Harrier will be exactly what I want.

If you have nothing more to say then don't say!

And if you're going to quote me, at least quote me properly! I didn't put the sarcastic smile in from of the sentence where I posted about the AV-8B avionics in BMS! I put it in the previous sentence, like I'm putting next to this one (again)

Rule 2.5

Never discuss 2.5. Try and brush the 5 year delay under the carpet and do not, under any circumstances, give any updates regarding your alleged high priority merger build. Do however, push as many payware campaigns as possible that will all need major rework in due course.

Sigh.... here we go again.....



Um, you just did. Have you already forgotten?



Wasn't that you just comparing BMS and DCS? Please let's not then get on a high horse, that's just plain silly.



You mean LEAKED, not stolen. Moot point anyway as the current IP holders of the Falcon name has given BMS its blessing.



Yeah, cherry-picking the criteria to skew in your favor. Regardless of whether the Falcon code was stolen or leaked, the FACT remains is that BMS is a FREE product that requires proof-of-ownership of the original Falcon 4.0 disc in order to work. So again, the point here is FREE vs. PAID.



Yeah, we were talking about simulators and you keep insisting on writing off Falcon BMS just because it's "stolen".... which one has the weak argument now?
Just sayin'.

https://news.usni.org/2015/08/04/pentagon-requests-funding-to-accelerate-harrier-data-link-upgrades

Does this mean real AV8 have only one way image datalink from lightning?
or they have some sort of datalink that use UHF n VHF ?

Many videos using 2.5 getting around Paradaz, including the one at the start of this thread, it's their company, so it is what it is, we can keep discussing this all day right, it wont change anything.

From what I've seen, it's coming along nicely and in a good position for their and our future.



Not here for that, you see what you see and that's ok. I see what I see and I hope your ok with that too.





I mean LEAKED then STOLEN, I'm thinking they had no choice or be willing to go to court to sort it out. At the end of the day - Ice, it was taken without permission and that's stealing.

stealing
"take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it."



At least say LEAKED vs. PAID. It's should never have been free for so many years with the work that went into F4, we are talking millions of dollars of code where LEAKED/STOLEN.

All fight sims are cool, they all have flaws.

I rate DCS at 7/10 just like steam does.

Same with F4, 7/10 just in different areas, only my opinion.

What would you rate these two sims at overall - Ice?

AV-8B NA Pocket Guide WIP