Jump to content
Dave

Announcing RAZBAM DCS: A-7E/D

Recommended Posts

Posted by RAZBAM-Cobra

 

Hey Folks!

Hey Folks!

 

It is with great pleasure that I can make this post-- and announce that the development of another fantastic RAZBAM product has already begun.

 

As you all know -- RAZBAM is home to a number of talented individuals, forming into semi-seperate, autonomous development teams, each working on their specific area or product. This affords us the ability to concurrently develop several high quality simulation titles in parralell, which obviously comes with massive advantages in terms of time and efficiency.

 

This module will focus on the A-7 Corsair II E / D aircraft. As with all of our products, the aircraft will be modelled down to the last nut, bolt and quirk. Going into details and specifics about the modelling of systems would be premature. Suffice to say; we are going all the way, as with all of our products. smile.gif

 

The A-7, unlike the rest of the RAZBAM line, will be updated every Saturday (excl. 3rd of Nov.).

 

At this moment we are in the middle of a full art overhaul of the exterior textures, model & animations. This is an important part of the process-- as our art skillset has considerably improved since publishing the FS-X version(s) of the A-7.

 

For your enjoyment I've snapped some pictures of the exterior mesh as it appears in realtime in 3DS Max at the time of writing. Apologies for the lack of proper AA – I'm currently running a backup PC which is not cooperating. smile.gif

 

Keep in mind these are VERY VERY Work in Progress – there are many mesh details and texture details either to be added/modified or re-done. It'll certainly look much different once it's finished.

 

Cheers, and I hope you'll enjoy what is to come

 

Couple more....

L3KO9.png

mAkmT.jpg

PGIxx.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The skin work on that A-7 is pretty impressive!

 

Now we need a proper carrier and carrier ops. I don't see it coming for a long time.

 

And the rest...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting a carrier isn't a big deal. We've got one or two there already and it shouldn't be too much to get one done right.

Getting the ops right, THAT will be hard. Between Flanker 2/LOMAC and Il-2/PF botching it, I've not seen a sim with proper carrier ops since the 20th century.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will fly the D version more. I like the USAF better. :blum:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love most of the announced DCS projects.

The fact that this one is Vietnam era, I love even more.

I am excited about the UH-1H as well.

When/if they are completed correctly, the DCS plane set will be respectable.

I just hate the fact that it may be 1-3 years before all the projects start being released.

It is the price of high fidelity, and I am grudgingly willing to pay it.

Hopefully, decent terrains are available by that time as well.

Edited by streakeagle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, the hope that there will be terrains to match these planes is what keeps me optimistic about this "go everywhere" plan. I'm not too worried about ground objects, I think the community will make a good number...I just hope ED will make them default in the main DCS World files so that if you buy say "Vietnam" you have NVA, South Vietnamese, and US time-appropriate ground objects in there to match. I'm not averse to a "what if" Vietnam in the 80s/90s, I just don't want that to be the ONLY choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be fair, Falcon 4.0 has two maps and Jane's F/A-18 has two maps.

I guess when you focus on systems fidelity of modern combat aircraft, there is little left for terrain.

I can enjoy well-modeled aircraft regardless of the terrain, especially in air-to-air combat, but historically accurate WoV and WoI were far more appealing to me than the fictional SFP1 terrain/campaigns.

ED appears to be maintaining more of a WoE approach: historical terrain with fictional campaigns.

I suspect their grab for FSX business will fail if they don't ever provide a complete "world".

Perhaps the product should have been named "DCS:Georgia".

As long as aircraft I really, really want are well-modeled like never before, the developer(s) providing them will get my money.

But at a minimum, I would like dedicated maps like SF2:Vietnam, SF2:Europe, and SF2:Israel.

However, I am much more interested in having a complete globe like FSX, especially one that varies with time to match major combat periods.

All I can do is wait and see what ED and its partners offer over time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, the problem is F4 and others had maps that were more currently historical. The Black Sea was last important in WWII. Georgia was a blip, there could never be a major conflict there unless Russia decided to invade with everything it had...and then it wouldn't last long. The West would never go to war with Russia over Georgia. Not any time soon. By the time that would be possible, we'd need PAK-FAs, F-22s, F-35s, Rafales, Typhoons, J-10/20/XX, and likely their successors modeled.

 

I remember Falcon 3 had a Panama map...and I never flew there. I just didn't buy the whole justification for the scenario, even though it was based on recent history. Meanwhile the Kuril Islands was very interesting. In both Hornet/F3 and F4 I barely flew in the Balkans, because even though it was current it never felt like it was a major air campaign hotspot.

 

DCS needs a Korea map, Vietnam (for the older planes), Iran and Iraq (I don't know that both could be merged due to sheer size, most past sims had them separate theaters), Israel/ME, and maybe Taiwan or Europe or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I own all of the A-7s from Razbam for FSX and DCS is in for a treat. They are some of the best models out there. The VC is super detailed and very functional. Using the INS takes some learning, but is well worth it. Even engine management is modelled. I cant count how many times I've cooked my engine in the TA-7.

 

-Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raz bam is like, going nuts with DCS Projects right now, .. when everything starts getting released for DCSW... My bank account is gonna take a hit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The key word is released......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another 3rd party project I won't be buying, good luck in sales though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cali you lack imagination my friend. The SLUF was a work horse bomb truck. If you like A2G work she can do it well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the list i have, is 2 pages in word for 3rd party modules, some unannounced, but 1 and a half pages all have PoC in game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A flying 3d model is hardly tough. A cockpit with 6DOF is more work, certainly, but getting a plane even to LOMAC/FC levels is no minor feat (or else ED would've released more planes years ago).

 

Getting DCS levels is a whole other ballgame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to say, ST0RM, that I just ever so slightly disagree with you - but it's your own opinion, and that's fine.

 

Personally, I have two Razbam FSX models (A-7 and A-4) and I thought both were so bad, I uninstalled them within a week and haven't seen them since!

 

On the other hand, there are some other 3rd parties, whose models I have for FSX or FC, building aircraft for DCS that do get my skin pimpling.

 

Having siad that, I would really like to have an decent A-7 in DCS:World - if they ever get it working properly - so here's hoping... :cool:

Edited by JDUK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to say, ST0RM, that I just ever so slightly disagree with you - but it's your own opinion, and that's fine.

 

Personally, I have two Razbam FSX models (A-7 and A-4) and I thought both were so bad, I uninstalled them within a week and haven't seen them since!

 

 

What was wrong with them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The A-4 is not an FSX native model. Simply a portover from FS9, so I can support your not liking it. It's old and shows it's age. The new Virtavia A-4F looks very promising.

 

Can you elaborate on what you did not like about the A-7? I does have a higher than normal learning curve with the INS and engine management, but as with any high-end add-on, thats expected.

 

I'm interested to hear your thoughts.

 

-Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's not a complaint about flight model, then i'd throw it away, as anything system related would need to be re-done anyway, in a sim that was designed for Military Airframes and no Boeing 747s.

 

To that respect, I had FS9 and FSX Packages that did a really crappy job of implementing some of the systems of military airframes, which is why I stopped using MSFS. though playing with the VRS SuperBug at my friends house was simply jaw dropping... specially in a Pit that was molded to the Shape of a hornet's forward section, complete with Hornet Canopy and Windscreen.... epic.. the perks of living near SuperHornet Pilots.. they bring their work home with them.. lol.

Edited by SkateZilla

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cali you lack imagination my friend. The SLUF was a work horse bomb truck. If you like A2G work she can do it well.

 

I lack nothing, that's not my cup of tea, I think it looks fugly and I don't like that older stuff. Same goes for the Mig-21, I won't be buying it, but I hope sales are good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just didn't like the handling at all, compared to other payware aircraft of a similar type ;)

 

For example, the control was far too light - the slightest tiny movement of the stick resulted in instant and imho exaggerated reaction from the aircraft.

 

This made them very 'finicky' or over sensitive - not like any other modern sim aircraft I've flown or the military trainers I have flown in RL.

 

I also thought other cockpits were better, though I didn't look into this as deeply as I normally would, as the handling put me off. I did give the Skyhawk a couple of tests at a later date, tbh, but still didn't like it.

 

Everyone has their opinion - that's mine, like it or not :beee:

 

PS - just remembered - I wasn't overly impressed with the textures on the Skyhwaks, either - looked very much outdated compared to many of the excellent ones around these days.

Edited by JDUK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, the Skyhawks are NOT for FSX. They are the old FS9 models. In their day, they were top of the line.

 

As for the A-7, no worries. It isnt a fly-by-wire jet, so most people dont like the learning curve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..