Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
streakeagle

DCS A-4 Skyhawk killed by cost of licensing from Boeing/McDonnell-Douglas

Recommended Posts

From this thread: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=125860&page=23

 

 

 

Hi Guys,

Unfortunately I have some not so good news on this project.

As a responsible developer one of our golden rules is that we will not develop a module without an agreement or waiver from an aircraft manufacturer, its common knowledge that this was one of the main hold ups with development of the Hawk.

As such we have been in talks with McDonnell Douglas (A division of Boeing) regarding obtaining agreements for the A-4C and the A-4M Skyhawks.

Sadly the terms offered to us in exchange for the licence are not economically viable for the project to continue. Therefore we have to stop works on the Skyhawk and park the project indefinitely.

Obviously this is a disappointing development not least for the DCS community but the members from the VEAO development team who have put blood sweat and tears into the project.

I want to publically thank the members of the Skyhawk development team for their hard work and commitment to this project.

But one thing in life is for sure, as one door closes another one opens.

Obviously due to the sensitive nature of commercial discussions such as this there is only limited amount of information that we can divulge in public but true to the nature of the relationship Chris and I work hard to maintain with you all we wanted to bring you this news as soon as we were able.

On behalf of everyone at VEAO we thank you for your understanding regarding this announcement.

Pman

VEAO Consumer Products Manager.

 

I remember when licensing issues hit IL-2 and Strike Fighters Project 1.

How can the F-15C Eagle be available to DCS, FSX, etc. and not the much older A-4 Skyhawk?

Presumably, others did not ask to license, but VEAO did... and got burned by the negotiated price.

How many DCS projects will ultimately be affected by this?

I find it depressing...

Both for the loss of the ever so great A-4 Skyhawk and any other future aircraft that will be lost to licensing issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Obviously due to the sensitive nature of commercial discussions such as this there is only limited amount of information that we can divulge in public but true to the nature of the relationship Chris and I work hard to maintain with you all we wanted to bring you this news as soon as we were able.

 

Really? Is it that Top Secret? Disaster after disaster for this sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DCS sims were always to hardcore for my taste, but I would have definitely taken a look at the skyhawk. MDD/Boeing and all other companies should consider such attempts as some sort of promotion for the (obviously great) work they have done in the past and they don't even have to pay for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't need to do this. They shot themselves in the foot by asking for a license where none was needed. The BAe Hawk deal seemed to indicate they want to do commercial work for these companies as well, so they're not willing to do anything that might upset them (even though I guarantee that unless they brought it up no one at Boeing would notice a Skyhawk in DCS World).

 

In simpler terms, the potential of a commercial contract with Boeing prevented them from doing something that WOULD make them money.

 

This pattern is quite common--these developers are often good artists/modelers/coders, but rarely good businesspeople. Just look at Ilya and PF/CloD/DCS WWII.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't need to do this. They shot themselves in the foot by asking for a license where none was needed. The BAe Hawk deal seemed to indicate they want to do commercial work for these companies as well, so they're not willing to do anything that might upset them (even though I guarantee that unless they brought it up no one at Boeing would notice a Skyhawk in DCS World).

 

In simpler terms, the potential of a commercial contract with Boeing prevented them from doing something that WOULD make them money.

 

This pattern is quite common--these developers are often good artists/modelers/coders, but rarely good businesspeople. Just look at Ilya and PF/CloD/DCS WWII.

 

Do not compare Ells to Illya, Chris knows what he is doing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

still baffled by the whole CONCEPT of licensing the image of aircraft paid for by taxpayer money, esp the now retired ones.......

License the Tigershark. Leave Scooters and Zippers alone!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure who funded the design and development of the A-4 - whether MD got money back from the tax payers for it or what.

 

Legally it is possible MD still own the rights to parts of it - although what parts (shape?) that actually is.............

 

MD may feel they can make money out of it perhaps - but it does seem a tad pathetic when it is also more advertising.

Edited by MigBuster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If an artist has the legal rights to their work, why should they hand it out for free when they can make a decent profit?

It doesn't matter what we think should be legal or illegal, all that matters are the laws on the books at the moment.

Apparently, VEAO's intent for future use needs legal consent (whether DCS needs it or not), so they followed their understanding of the law.

The only suggestion I have for DCS third parties is that if they feel they need a legal license, they should secure those before planning and posting their development/release list or spending even one man hour on the project at all.

I am concerned, because if they won't license the A-4 for a reasonable price, where does that leave the F-4?

Yet the F/A-18C is definitely being done by ED.

We don't know the legal details, so we can't really know why the A-4 is too expensive but the F-15C and F/A-18 are are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The newsletter explained some delays so it could be anything...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty disappointed. I really was excited about the Scooter for DCS.

  • Like 1

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
Sign in to follow this  

×

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..