Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 18 of 23 1 2 16 17 18 19 20 22 23
#4454444 - 12/22/18 09:15 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
The enormity of the EF2000 development time VEAO was honest about from the beginning of this venture, The team knew it would take longer than the expected 6-12 months projected time frame to complete the Hawk.
Systems in the Typhoon obviously far more intensive than the engineer Tango was capable of. Yet VEAO never swayed from their "we have the clearance, we have the knowledge\man power stance"


[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

Consumer were reassured that VEAO would not be guessing their way through he development. Perhaps at this stage so early on, P-man could have called an emergency meeting at Nando's with Chris and had a skype chat with
Tango on what he could actually achieve. Had any of Tango's resume actually been looked over, references contacted etc? did anyone contact the L-39 team to see if the work was actually up to scratch?
Did VEAO look over the dosier of crap presented by Tango and ask themselves "well we need to start somewhere" They were putting job advertisements up on the ED forums for Pete's sake (see what I did there)
It looked like a farce to me, but not to ED Team who endorsed them through the lies and zero background checks.

If VEAO decided to release a book, my guess is it would be called "Lord of the Lies" Than again, it would only have a 4 or 5 pages, the contents would be released as the Alpha, Beta would be "this book is dedicated...." and the tester's
team would spend the next 6 years spell checking chapter 1.


Consumer's were assured VEAO has the skill set to be one of the best 3rd party developer's early on, backer's\investors were reassured time and again.
Yet compare this from 2014, a couple of years on and after Alpha release of the Hawk. Did anyone else get the vibe that the head swelled to a point where VEAO forgot about the consumer and went for the military contracts?

Pretty much the bread and butter of any business is the consumer, or Joe Public. On the back of the public you build the business but in a matter of 2 years, the public was forgotten the military contracts took priority.

[Linked Image]





Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#4454524 - 12/23/18 10:55 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
The story thus far is a briefing of the very beginnings and formation of VEAO

Long before VEAO's WW2 announcements etc, only 2 aircraft were in the pipeling, the Hawk and Typhoon.
The plan was, release the Hawk, gain knowledge, release the typhoon. In many of the updates that came over the years, Chris refers many times to Pete and the WW2 aircraft.
Perhaps Pete knew then VEAO had no idea how to code anything technical especially basic functions like implementing the aden gun pod sounds.

2013 CLOSED ALPHA TESTING

[Linked Image]

a couple of posts under that very announcement.....

[Linked Image]

Yet more hysteria followed this announcement, VEAO were well and truly on their way to self destruction.

Source

I as a consumer believed the "set up deals" the project manage part of the quote left much to be desired. Yet I, like other's before and after me, had faith that VEAO could deliver.
Had VEAO stuck with the original plan, Hawk - Typhoon, perhaps this mess may never have occurred.
Could this be the turning point of what lead to the downfall?

Fast forward to the present, Britain's politicians are infighting as to how to pull out of the EU....much like VEAO are fighting to leave ED.

Perhaps a leadership spill could have saved this company.






.

#4454527 - 12/23/18 11:19 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
The yanks called it HEARTS AND MINDS
VEAO surely were winning hearts and minds in the sim community.

Like a well thought out scam.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

In talks with Thrustmaster for a giveaway prize well before the Alpha was released... Who would question that?

A prize on what is not implemented....did anyone actually win the prize? The intentions were good.

[Linked Image]

The Alpha had not even been released, yet they were "setting the standard" Is this not the inner workings of a con job?
Can't blame those who bought into the BS,

Nine Line was gracious enough to remove all of his posts from the entire VEAO forum several months ago....His
endorsement was highly instrumental in steering the customer base ship toward the ice berg.




#4454533 - 12/23/18 12:24 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
VEAO offered a chance to fly the hawk for free (pre alpha), a 'shareware' for those older air-frame simmers like myself from back in the day.
This was a bold move on VEAO's part. Yet it forged the relationship between customer and company.
You could almost look at this as one of the foundations laid by VEAO that built trust in the forums.
I didn't bother contributing to the answers for a free ride weekend, this gesture by Chris exceeded my expectations.

[Linked Image]

Source

#4454535 - 12/23/18 12:58 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 430
Vaderini Offline
Member
Vaderini  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 430
Quote
Had VEAO stuck with the original plan, Hawk - Typhoon, perhaps this mess may never have occurred.

Doubtful, considering the troubles they have had with some basic features of the Hawk.

IMO the problem stems from:

1) nobody at VEAO having any sort of coding background; they’re just managers without anything to manage, playing being a manager. So everything needs to be out-sourced, which is absolutely ridiculous and completely the other-way around in software development. Coders should seek managers when they cannot cope with the scale of the project, not managers seeking coders/artists to satisfy some childish dream.

2) ED not lifting a finger to explain DCS coding to third parties, nor giving any info on what they’re doing that could influence third party modules. Devs learn of changes to DCS pretty much at the same time the community learns about them. Often, they don’t even communicate anything; They just change stuff to the engine without mentioning it even in a basic changelog (as has been proven multiple times by frustrated devs/testers in posts that are now deleted, ofcourse) Also, they don’t do any due diligence on who they give third party status and who they don’t. No background checks, no security deposit, nothing at all.

It is pretty much: “oh you want to develop for us? You look promising from what you’ve shown so far, so here you go”


Quote
Fast forward to the present, Britain's politicians are infighting as to how to pull out of the EU....much like VEAO are fighting to leave ED.


They’re bankrupt, so all VEAO work is handled by the administrator. VEAO has already left the building, and the administrator won’t give the source code for free. (Nor would ED do anything with it, considering they would need to understand and fix the Hawk coding, which takes more work than building it from the ground up themselves. Nor is there any incentive to work on the Hawk, since most sales are already made, and taking the project over would mean making an entire module and release it for free to the community.

How sour ED responds to this debacle is testament to their amateurism (being a UK Ltd. wrapped into a swiss société anonyme is already a lawyers’ facepalm of not knowing what in hell you’re doing anyway, so this should be expected from Child Hobbyists & Co).
In the mean-time, ED has an easy scape goat on which to put all the blame: VEAO

Oh, and by the way: Happy birthday Cichlidfan! Better late than never 😉

#4454560 - 12/23/18 04:09 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,800
ST0RM Offline
Senior Member
ST0RM  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 4,800
Ten Mile, Tn
This failure falls straight into ED's lap. When VEAO failed to meet any contractual timelines that were established between the two parties, their product should have been suspended against further sale and a warning issued for breach of contract/timeline. But we know how poorly ED holds a timeline in regard, so thats a "Meh".

Lastly, ED's failure to notify the 3rd parties of the internal code changes further exasperated the situation when VEAO didnt have the skills to code and keep up.

I'm truly curious how the other 3rd parties are being handled, that have not produced needed updates. Polychop, Mag3? Even Mil-Tek 5 with the nearly vaporware Bo-105. Come on, just call it quits already. By the dev time they've shown as a side job, imagine how long updates will take.

#4454566 - 12/23/18 04:54 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,572
LOF_Rugg Offline
Senior Member
LOF_Rugg  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,572
It's the same ol same ol from ED, however I must comment on something: getting updates from developers down the pipeline to the teams that create the modules isn't just an ED failure. It's fairly common in the gaming world where the producer/developer have little to no experience with working with an outside team. Google Obsidian Edge/Far Cry. I was part of that dev team and when Crytek announced we were the first official mod for Far Cry we thought "great, now we can get some things done instead of hacking around the code". Crytek was slow in getting us engine updates and some of the other stuff we needed so the drive to work for free fell off. Which is a shame because our map guy was amazing. OE started out as a tactical mod for FarCry and had some really neat things that hadn't been seen in FPS's up till then. Night vision that would bloom if hit with bright light. When you got shot it spun your character (and reticle) a random amount so it was slower to get back on target. The mod itself was fun as hell to play, we had a nice little community, but when the devs got involved everything went downhill. I doubt Crytek did it on purpose, they were just on their own timeline and it was hard for them to commit resources to us when they were overwhelmed. So while I'd like to slag ED for being clueless I suspect it's more like what happened to us. Resources. However, that doesn't change the fact that once they sold a module they put their own name on it. Which in the legal world is very common. I'm a contractor. If I show up to a jobsite where the first contractor was fired and he did some shoddy work I am responsible for everything on that job if I accept the contract. Even if I missed something. Same thing with software. If for instance someone put some malware in the code for WORLD and it damaged customers, ED would be responsible and would very likely lose a class action suit. So with that being said I don't envy anyone who has to deal with a major developer of software.

#4454617 - 12/23/18 10:35 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: ST0RM]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
Originally Posted by ST0RM
This failure falls straight into ED's lap.


50/50, systematic failures on both parties. The development already 5 years in, Pre Alpha was released but no party bothered to look into how updates would be carried out within the 'world' cue the community to press for answers

[Linked Image]

Wouldn't updates have been one of the 1st items to be looked at and discussed in the contract between both parties? It was a guessing game driven by the sim community which opened VEAO & Ed's Eyes as to what they missed
during initial discussions.

[Linked Image]

[Linked Image]

Who remember's the AFM PFM EFM SFM saga that followed upon release?

[Linked Image]

Later on in this review, I will share the post where VEAO initiated and settled on releasing an SFM and charging consumer's for what would follow 12 odd months after the above quote 'PFM'

Source




#4454634 - 12/23/18 11:30 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
2014 was the year consumer's could look forward to, especially for those who followed the progress of the Hawk.

[Linked Image]

2014 could be classed as the top of the hill for VEAO.

Since the alpha testers posted their thoughts late in 2013. VEAO had certainly lived up to the hype train that followed them



A thread was created called "First Impressions"

Source

And with a bold statement like this one.

[Linked Image]

Rest assured, ED and TFC fully supported (at the time) VEAO's venture and obligations. Yes the head of the Mig-21 venture quit but the rest of the team (Leatherneck) picked up and moved on.
Perhaps had the head of VEAO packed up and left.....All 3rd parties have their ups and downs, early in 2014 VEAO were powering on. No cracks in the glass house to be seen publicly not even with the Tango.



#4454641 - 12/23/18 11:54 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,903
Paradaz Offline
Senior Member
Paradaz  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,903
UK
It's quite ironic really that I have tended to only believe/trust in people that have their posting rights revoked on the ED boards......these are people that have told the truth and/or aren't afraid of ED's censorship. yep


On the Eighth day God created Paratroopers and the Devil stood to attention.
#4454643 - 12/24/18 12:04 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Paradaz]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
Originally Posted by Paradaz
It's quite ironic really that I have tended to only believe/trust in people that have their posting rights revoked on the ED boards......these are people that have told the truth and/or aren't afraid of ED's censorship. yep


I couldn't agree more. Browsing through the VEAO forums over the years, plenty have that tag. Why now that ED are not supporting VEAO has Nine Line and the hoards of moderators allowing free speech in the VEAO threads.
Where was mine and everyone else who spoke out in the VEAO threads right to freedom of speech?

It is a Farce, an epic story to behold

#4454646 - 12/24/18 12:21 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
This is the 1st instance where it shows a breakdown of relationship between Tango and VEAO.
personally, this was at this moment VEAO hit the top of the mountain and the publication of this next image was VEAO taking their 1st step down the other side.

[Linked Image]

Pretty much after that post, Tango remained relatively quiet on the ED forums, Chris stopped referring to Tango and the "hit by a bus" was most likely venting VEAO's frustration

most noteworthy is the AFM progress going slow, the release of an FC3 but with clickable cockpit. Surely this was the beginning of the downturn.


**** intentionally skipped to the next image ****

I will fill in this blank later


VEAO announced that Hawk was only moments from release.

However, let me elaborate on an earlier post with regards to the EFM SSM AFM PFM XLS WRD LUA DOC and 10's of other abbreviations which were termed for flight models.

[Linked Image]

This was shortly clarified by VEAO

[Linked Image]





#4454657 - 12/24/18 01:21 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 430
Vaderini Offline
Member
Vaderini  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 430
Could you do an overview about how Tango went through working for pretty much every 3rd party developer, with eventually becoming a persona non grata within DCS and getting banned (of course)?

Never got that story fully, and i'm learning a lot of new stuff in this interesting overview popcorn

Quote
It's quite ironic really that I have tended to only believe/trust in people that have their posting rights revoked on the ED boards......these are people that have told the truth and/or aren't afraid of ED's censorship.

How sad is it that I first have to check if Rollin' Matt and Packager Norm are active on a site, to ensure I get the truth instead of some sanitized "take my money" "DCS iS tHe MoSt ReAlIsTiC SiMuLaToR eVuUuUrRrRrRr" bull?

Thank god for sites like SimHQ, Twomoreweeks, DCS community facebook, Il-2, and all other sites where Norm got banned because he can't communicate with people in a normal, decent, and respectful way. At least there still are plenty of outlets where you can get the truth, and nothing but the truth smile

Last edited by Vaderini; 12/24/18 01:22 AM.
#4454663 - 12/24/18 02:18 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Vaderini]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 7,637
CyBerkut Offline
Administrator
CyBerkut  Offline
Administrator
Hotshot

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 7,637
Florida
Originally Posted by Vaderini
...
How sad is it that I first have to check if Rollin' Matt and Packager Norm are active on a site, ...



If you want to criticize Matt's actions / statements, you're free to do so. Please knock it off with the "Rollin' Matt" nickname. That is just an unnecessarily cheap shot.


Thanks.

#4454665 - 12/24/18 02:50 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Vaderini]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
Originally Posted by Vaderini
Could you do an overview about how Tango went through working for pretty much every 3rd party developer, with eventually becoming a persona non grata within DCS and getting banned (of course)?

Never got that story fully, and i'm learning a lot of new stuff in this interesting overview popcorn


I'll be honest, I never got the full Tango story. What I got was lies hiding the truth of what was taking place behind the scenes.

Back to 2013, VEAO were being hammered about implementing a rear seat. The L-39 had been announced by ED as having rear seat implemented. Chris said the code had to be completely redone back then for a rear seat.
Little did he know that the entire aircraft would need to be re-coded once EDGE was finalised. Did VEAO have knowledge that the entire aircraft would need a complete recode for EDGE and ignored it?
or was it at that moment that the blame shifted from Tango to ED? rest easy gents, I will get to that moment in due time.The blame at this point at the beginning of 2014 could be laid squarely on Tango.
We as consumer's do not need to have the full story to gather that much. 2014 was when the delay's began.

Right before in that post above from Chris, VEAO were on the search of an AFM coder.

[Linked Image]

Did VEAO come out then and honestly say there was an internal issue (infighting) that would delay the Hawk as a complete re-write of the code would need to be carried out? nope. It was still
"Full steam ahead" Tango himself said here at SimHQ that because his code was still being used, VEAO were contracted to keep paying him a percentage of sales from
the Hawk (shame he has deleted the post) Pretty sure it was in this forum Here

What we know is that in order for Tango to be cut loose completely from VEAO and prevent a percentage of sales going to Tango. All of Tango's code would need to be removed from the Hawk.

A product delaying complete re-write from start to finish, Was ED informed of the situation? I'd reach out for comment but being banned unfortunately prevents me seeking answers.

What we know is that months later, ED must have got word on the situation.

I like the earlier "we have the full support of ED"

to the now "fm away from ED"

[Linked Image]

And the earlier collaborations where VEAO mentioned "we will be sharing infomation blah blah blah....."

That does not look like ED where that keen to share information, especially regarding AFM's EFM's PFM's .DOC .PFD etc etc etc

If they were, VEAO chose to ignore it an do their own thing.









#4454683 - 12/24/18 06:23 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
What VEAO would need to keep the future consumers on side is a diversion.
Il-2 honcho pulled the pin leaving ED to keep that dream alive.
This diversion could not come quick enough. I will focus on
January 2014 to April of 2014. April being the announcement
Of VEAO's commitment to DCS WW2

These key months are vital to the overall perspective which would
Lead us to where VEAO are today.

As it's Christmas Eve. I will come back to this in a couple of days.....


#4454766 - 12/24/18 05:51 PM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: CyBerkut]  
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 430
Vaderini Offline
Member
Vaderini  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 430
Originally Posted by CyBerkut
That is just an unnecessarily cheap shot.

When you talk about a person that goes out of his way to insult and ridicule collegues and customers, doesn't give a crap about his job and just uses it as an excuse to play videogames all day, and has never in his life even tried to be a decent and pleasant human being, than at that moment you really talk about the lowest of low life forms. There is no excuse for being lazy or intentionally ignorant.

Anyway, I'll try to reach out to a couple of former VEAO employees after christmas, to see if they want to go on record and give their side of the story about what happened. It must not have been easy for them, to continue coding/texturing on somebody else's work as a part-timer. It should be interesting to hear from them smile

#4454851 - 12/25/18 08:58 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
The release is immanent, Wags states the product terms, Chris follows up and clarifies the product terms....Chris states the release is now "5 weeks away" or something to that extent.

Yet here we see

[Linked Image]

It was after this post I began to question that something was not right. Not publicly in the forums, but in the sim community I was a part of at that time. I flew with a squadron who was looking forward to the Hawk,
as many other squadrons all around the world were looking forward to the aircraft in question. One of our members contributed to the pre alpha.
Based on his review, I like other's, were looking forward to getting our hands on the official copy. (our group disbanded the middle of 2015)

Yet, no official comment or statement that there were internal issues portrayed to the community other than 'our lawyers blah blah blah'. (how many times did that crap get regurgitated?)
For those new to this thread, my anger in the 1st several pages at the very beginning stem from my anger leading up to 2016. Not once even before the WW2 commitment did VEAO release any public statement
honestly to the consumer's that there would be major coding delays. When there were delays, they were 'official' lies. The Typhoon was still on track for Q4 of 2014.

If you look at the statement from Chris on the 20-12-18, it is along the lines of "our lawyers have told us to remain silent on the matter" much like the post above regarding the delay of the Hawk.
It doesn't take a genius, let alone a pissed off consumer to see through the lies and BS as to where the actual fault remains in this entire saga.

Yet, to fully understand the 20-12-18 statement, Look at the entire situation from start to finish.
Infighting with Tango, contractual deadlines set forth by VEAO for Tango to follow, the code being used in the Hawk during and after alpha release. As it included Tango's code, a complete re-write would further delay the release (in 2014).
No mention in the forums of the internal dramas. VEAO was on the hunt for an AFM coder.....it must have taken at least 2 years for VEAO to find someone with working knowledge to recode the hawk.

Tango had VEAO by the balls, literally. We can briefly look at the situation today and lay eyes on ED's 1.5 & 2.5 release but VEAO had contractual obligations to release something.
VEAO were making promises they could not contractually keep. ED should have pulled the pin back then. Right after the post by Chris above..

I am getting to that point in time, As a consumer, I feel the need to tell the story from my perspective. The saying goes "The customer is always right" isn't it? This is how my hard earned money was spent in my opinion.
I could have bought a bottle of whiskey. I could have bought many things, however as I have my time over again, i'd rather spend my $50 now on my perspective of how VEAO failed to live up to the hype and con the consumer's into this scam.

It took years for Chris and VEAO to come out and say that a complete recode of the hawk structure was required to fit in with 1.5\2.0. Honestly to get Tango out the picture back in 2014 the re-code should have taken place then.








#4454852 - 12/25/18 09:36 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Vaderini]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
Originally Posted by Vaderini
I'll try to reach out to a couple of former VEAO employees after christmas, to see if they want to go on record and give their side of the story about what happened. It must not have been easy for them, to continue coding/texturing on somebody else's work as a part-timer. It should be interesting to hear from them smile


Don't bother, they all signed NDA's with VEAO and ED, just post a link to page 32 on the ED forums, since they are allowing freedom of speech in the VEAO section now. Let ED's forum fanbois decide if what I am writing here is BS or not.

Grab a screen shot and link it here, if forum censorship has been lifted by Nine Line it won't be removed. Best create a new account on a VPN just in case, I don't have the highest standing with Nine Line and the cohorts..

#4455009 - 12/27/18 10:38 AM Re: DCS: VEAO Hawk EFM & Damage Model [Re: Winfield]  
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield Offline
model citizen
Winfield  Offline
model citizen
Member

Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
Let me recap for a moment.

The release is imminent, All is going to plan yet Chris craps on about lawyer's delaying the release of the Hawk.
Looks like I am not the only one who saw through the BS to what where the actual issue lay

[Linked Image]

Is that not the same issues that had taken place with the release of ED's 1.5 and current 2.0\2.5?

I am looking for the post by Chris where he states that the rear seat may or may not be coded due ED informing VEAO that the new code structure would mean a complete re-code of the Hawk. This is still very early in 2014.....
VEAO and ED had knowledge way back then the hawk would require a complete overhaul in order to work in the sim and keep up with the later EDGE. VEAO chose to ignore it but work on the current code to implement a
hack job rear seat long before 1.5 was released. Obviously time delaying and adding to the development costs.

Give me a while....I waited 6 years for a fully functioning hawk...surely you can wait a day or so for me to find Chris's post on the rear seat smile

This one makes me laugh....so close yet so far, doesn't the cockpit issues sound like something regurgitated when ED announced their own L-39 project.
Tango's side project never had a cockpit after 10 years. Now look here....Hawk doesn't even have a fully functioning cockpit after the delay in release......
surely alarm bells were ringing with ED here? How can an aircraft be released with out a functioning cockpit?? obviously it can't or ED would not have made a fully functioning
L-39 from scratch in 18 months......

[Linked Image]

Page 18 of 23 1 2 16 17 18 19 20 22 23

Moderated by  Force10, RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
I thought that this was pretty amazing....
by Pooch. 04/10/21 12:21 AM
More troubles for the 737 Max
by KraziKanuK. 04/09/21 07:55 PM
Prince Philip has died
by KraziKanuK. 04/09/21 11:33 AM
On board the Wilhelm Gustloff
by Docjonel. 04/09/21 05:54 AM
Eagle deuce
by Crane Hunter. 04/09/21 01:51 AM
what's your internet context
by jroc. 04/08/21 01:40 AM
Old Tourist Film from Newfoundland
by No105_Archie. 04/06/21 03:36 AM
US Air Force Skyborg Program
by Arthonon. 04/06/21 12:39 AM
Generation Zero
by KRT_Bong. 04/05/21 12:11 PM
Best guitar solos
by rwatson. 04/04/21 05:42 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0