You said:"Now that the product has been withdrawn I feel both fooled and unsupported."I think you are out of luck here, as they won't care at all in my opinion, since their website states No Refunds will be given and all sales are final on some of their products by download.You do however have a choice who you do business with, so maybe next time consider someone else.I think in this situation , SimMarket should offer refunds to anyone who seeks one for this product.But Integrity is sadly missing in this hobby for some, so I wouldn't expect it.Regards,JoeGrab My FREEWARE Voice recognition Profiles here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=58334]Cessna 172 Voice Profile[/a][a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=fs2004misc&DLID=60740]FSD Avanti Voice Profile[/a].You will need the main FREEWARE Flight Assistant program to use it, get it here:[a href=http://library.avsim.net/esearch.php?CatID=genutils&DLID=39661]Flight Assistant 2.2[/a]

Rob I'm sorry for what happened.However Sigma and DSB wrote a statement at sim-outpost:here the link:http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php?t=2403Now to the refund cruciade.So far this guy hasn't been listening to me:(I can't believe they advertised features that weren't present in the product. They tried to convince me it was a technical problem and that it would have been addressed by dsb in the future. However that wasn't he point. My point was that they led me to believe that features were present where in fact they weren't. Full stop.I've been tricked if we want to put it this way :(Let's say they should check what they're selling before giving it to customers. and honestly I would be more than happy to keep the product if it gets patched and if the issue with Rob gets solved.RegardsLuca-------------------------Dear O????,I find myself in an ackward situation because:A) I've been led to believe from simmarket that listed features are included where in fact they aren't.Please note that I contacted dsbdesign and they confirmed me that these features are missing.This brings me back to my previous sentence:I've been led to believe from simmarket that listed features are included where in fact they aren't.:( The product has been now withdrawn because presumably dsbdesign has committed piracy by using freeware gauges in their payware product.These points (A and :( are good enough to expect a refund. If you are unable to do so, could you please point me to the right person at simmarket able to help me out?---------------------

Why wasn't this product pulled from sale while the investigation was being made? Apparently DSB(Sigma) was notified of this issue last week. I looked late last night and the original Harrier was still available for sale via their web site.This could have been dealth with in a classy, respectful manner by simply pulling the product when the accusation was made. Clearly, the evidence is overwhelming. Instead, it would appear that DSB responded with legal stalling while they continued to offer the Harrier for sale with its stolen gauge technologies. Then, when it became public and the forums heated up, they came forward with some concessions.I don't care who the developer is -- DSB is the publisher and they had an obligation to act responsibly in this manner.I am sure this will probably come to a satisfactory end for Rob now that it is out in the open. However, DSB could of, and should of, responded immediately with appropriate action (retracting the product from sale and issuing an announcement that an investigation was being made). Would any of us have thought badly about DSB if they had done that? We probably would have thought they should have done a bit more due diligence to ensure that the work they recieved from the developer was original, but I think we would have understood and appreciated the fact they were taking an action. I could understand the delay if it was C++ or something, but we are talking about a human readable file that any git could look at and compare. And don't give me any cr*p about lawyers .... it's not like Rob is assembling a legal team.Sorry ... DSB or Sigma or whoever they are is on my blacklist. I won't purchase any of their products.I continue to be amazed and appreciative of freeware developers who give us their valuable time and talents simply for the love of the hobby and its community.

They have, right in this forum.

>They have, right in this forum.Yeah, but they hadn't when I posted that. I suspected it would merely be a matter of time.

Concerning payware downloadable products being refunded,this would represent a logistics quagmire for the distributorsregarding this or any other product. Not a reasonable demand in this instance.-----------------------------------------In the meantime, we have seen communication between the partiesconcerned in this and other forums.In many countries we live under the maxim of "innocence beforequilt" and therefore patience should be in order here prior todraconian demands of the commercial entities involved.------------------------------------------------------If the parties concerned reach a consensus to their mutual satisfaction (we trust they do don't we?)this incident willbe behind us.Nobody's feet should be put to the wall at this stage.Time and patience and I trust that we will be appraisedof developments.Regards, JAHamilton - Los Angeles.

This is a terrible thing if it proves to be true, I will be following this with interest.As for this - "Concerning payware downloadable products being refunded,this would represent a logistics quagmire for the distributorsregarding this or any other product. "It seems Flight1 and all those who use their distribution system are able to provide refunds quite fine.

>Concerning payware downloadable products being refunded,>this would represent a logistics quagmire for the>distributors>regarding this or any other product. Sorry ... I have to call you on this one ... Flight1 offers refunds if you aren't satisfied with a product, and there was an instance where I've worked with a developer on a refund/exchange for a product -- and that particular company was very accomodating and understanding.For some it is a "logisitics quagmire". For others it is standing behind a product.

Flight1 are usually both the developer and distributor of their packages - I have never tried to get a refund for someone else's product distributed using the F1 wrapper, but if they refund someone else's product, they must either recover the money from the developer or take the hit from their bottom line.Very nice of them, but not the best way of making money in a tight market, is it? They have effectively paid for your copy of the product themselves. You say you've deleted it - what proof do they have that you didn't just give your code/product to someone else, or kept it and got your money back as well? Flight1 lock the product to a PC, none of the products I've installed recently from Simmarket are, they're just install code protected.I quite understand Simmarket's - and most other distributors' - position on refunds.Ian P.

Fair enough.... :)

In many jurisdictions the purchaser has the legal right to cancel the agreement within a specified time period, return the goods and get his money back, if the agreement is based on distance selling, which includes over the internet. This right may not be overridden by the agreement.In those jurisdictions, which include the UK and Europe as well as the State of Victoria Australia, the "distributors' position" is irrelevant.

IanP, post #97 explains the problem.However, let's not digress.This is Rob's thread.Thanks, JAHamilton - Los Angeles.

>Sorry ... DSB or Sigma or whoever they are is on my blacklist.>I won't purchase any of their products.When I first read this thread by Rob, I never had any doubt he had been slighted by DSB and DSB had, one way or another, used freeware in their payware. I also knew right then I would probably not buy the Harrier, but this was moot since I wasn't going to buy it anyway.Now that DSB, through Karen, has made an attempt to clarify the situation, I think it would be prudent to wait and see what happens without irrationally jumping off the deep end as some have seen fit to do with their comments. True, DSB may be guilty of attempting to put some spin on the issue. However, two things stand out: if, as Karen says, they had a contract with an outside source, then perhaps DSB is being somewhat victimized in a sense, too. Also, posts here and events tend to unfold very rapidly and if Karen was unable to contact David for even half a day, they would suddenly find themselves far behind the curve and the damage already done.It appears, however, that over 90% of the negative posts are coming from people who do NOT own their own distribution/production/design businesses for profit in the flightsim add-on market. I would guess, also not being in that field, there are many nuances that Karen/DSB must negotiate that we are unaware of.As a business owner in another, unrelated field, I can certainly guarantee that. Business owners are beholden to so many, sometimes, it's a wonder we do it at all!I suggest we now wait and see how DSB plans on remedying this issue, and making good on what is possibly just a very drastic mistake on their part. Let's see if they make good on it, before we continue to condemn them. My only suggestion to DSB is make it a very, very good remedy. Make the wronged parties happy, and then some.After all, it might be best to remember that this may have happened to anyone.Patience, now.Dan

My full support to you Rob. Well done for bringing this up & doing so in the proper manner.XML code like this is as individual as any signature. The style of logic & the user defined variables of all developers are quite different.The worst thing here is that this isn't just any old gauge, it's a complex solution and was a major feature of this DSB Harrier.Anyway now people know, they can make their own mind up about it.Thanks.David Maltby

I just wanted to confirm, by adding the following in support of Rob's claim, that I have checked the relevant files as detailed below: HarrierVSTOLControlF10.xml (extracted from RCBhc-15.zip: FS2004 controls & effects for a Harrier aircraft By Rob Barendregt 30 June 2004 Release 1.5 - This archive was released with a set of gauges, effects, sounds and a new flightmodel that could be added to Adam Preece's GR.7 Harrier.)Start of File:This gauge controls the elevator, aileron and rudder trim at slower speeds, to enable a more stablehoovering and VSTOL operation with a Harrier aircraft.It also controls Flaps setting in certain cases, plus uses Afterburner thrust for VSTOL operation.When enabled, the aileron and rudder trim follow their axis position; the axis effect is strengthened bythe trim command (nozzle-position dependant).From elevator trim, there are two modes:- PitchHold OFF: Elevator trim (like ailerons and rudder) follows Elevator axis position.- PitchHold ON: the gauge manipulates elevator trim, attempting to hold a (adjustable) 6 degree Pitch angle while disabling the elevator.The gauge (i.e. trim, afterburner and flaps control) is only active when the Autopilot Master is Off(to allow the AP to control trims), with the nozzles in the 4 vertical positions and the throttles greater than 50% (when on the ground).Above airspeeds of 100 knots IAS and activated autopilot, the nozzles are always forced in the Horizontalposition, i.e. maximum flap-position.3To prevent the (overpowered) aircraft to start takeoff with ParkingBrakes set, the ParkingBrakes areautomatically released when the throttles are greater then 50%.When the gauge de-activates, it sets the trims to neutral.Obviously, when the gauge is active, user trim commands are ineffective since they are immediately corrected.NOTE: - Only ONE instance of this gauge should be defined in the panel.cfg, preferably in a VC section.- This gauge will ONLY work correctly when the aircraft has the matching aircraft.cfg file !!!Design info:Harrier aircraft are difficult to model in FS, since it needs to combine the characteristics of a helicopterand a fast jet, just with one engine.Starting points and FS limitations:- Flaps and nozzles are usually modelled together, with the FS Flaps function.- Adding drag in FS also generates lift, vice versa.- An aircraft with lots of drag/lift is also very "light-weight"; resulting in the aircraft easily being picked up by a even little wind when on the ground; and tumbling over when brakes are applied. Therefore, it can only sit on the ground with brakes on, in a configuration with little drag/lift, even with the engine Off.- Real Harriers use main (downward) thrust for VSTOL operation/hoovering, while having seperate thrusters for lateral and directional movement. In FS, this can only be modelled by excessive effectiveness of the control surfaces.- For VSTOL (when modeled by excessive drag/lift), the aircraft needs to be way over-powered.- Hence, if configured for proper VSTOL operation, the aircraft is almost unflyable for normal flight if no special "tricks" are added.- FS only has 10 possible Flaps positions.This gauge (combined with the proper FDE) is intended for use with Adam Preece' Harrier-GR7.This excellent visual model has the flaps/nozzle combined in the FS Flaps function; however, the aircraftmodel itself has different "flaps" definitions for flaps and nozzle animation.The solution:- A 10-position flaps function, split as follows: - 4 positions flaps (with nozzles horizontal). Visually: 0, 10, 20 and 40 degrees. In these positions, only little drag/lift is added. - 4 positions nozzles (with full flaps). Visually: 0, 20, 45, 75, 90 degrees. Especially with in flaps.7 position, excessive lift/drag is added. - 2 positions nozzles, without lift/drag. So: flaps.7 (max.flaps, max. nozzles) is visually identical to flaps.9; the latter only has NO lift/drag. This is to overcome the "wind" problem; the gauge automatically switches flaps.6,7 to flaps.8,9 when the aircraft is on the ground and brakes are applied. And vice versa. So visually the nozzles are still vertical, but there's no lift/drag in position 8,9.- The gauge uses excessive elevator/ailerons/rudder TRIM control when nozzles are directed in a vertical position, to be able to "steering" the aircraft; the trim commands follow the control surfaces axis'.- Depending on the nozzles direction, this gauge switches the Afterburner On/Off to gain additional thrust for VSTOL operation. Hence the .air file needs the variable "Afterburner Thrust factor vs. Mach number" to be set to a high value (like 7) to generate the high thrust, without effecting normal cruise flight.The result:A Harrier that:- In normal cruise, flies like an ordinary jet (including realistic accelleration, and control surfaces effectiveness). It won't fall out of the sky when you even look at the rudder pedal.- Is able to do takeoff/landing/hoovering at speeds as low as 5 -10 knots. While being still controlable due to high thrust (Afterburner) and Trim control. Note however, that flying at Zero IAS is still not possible, since there is ONLY lift if IAS greater than zero.- Sits still on the ground while brakes are applied... Even with 30 knots headwind !!.Of course the values in this gauge (and the aircraft.cfg file) can be tweaked to preference.However: NEVER change the number of Flaps settings (10); requires lots of adaptation in this gauge !!.Used variables:- Var1,2,3: State of the trim axis controller (needed to let trim return to zero after deactivation).- Var4: Last-written flaps handle position- Var5: Current flaps handle position.- Var6: Nozzle-dependant elevator trim offset, adjusted in time, to hold the set Target pitch. - Var9: Initialisation- VSTOLLocked: if true, max flaps position is forced to flaps.3- TrimControlValid: if true, indicates that trims are controlled by gauge.- HarrierPitchAngle: adjustable pitch angle when nozzles NOT horizontal.- HarrierPitchHold: activate PitchHold when ON and TrimCOntrol ON.COPYRIGHT STATEMENT: Although this gauge is freeware, it may NOT be renamed, copied,modified, or bundled in an other archive, without my prior consent.Rob Barendregt, 29 june 2004----------------------------------------------------------------- VSTOL Controller.xml (extracted from Harrier_GR7.CAB which was installed to my Flight Simulator 9Gauges folder as part of the DSB Sigma Harrier package purchased on Wednesday 06 July, 2005 from DSB Direct.Start of File: N.B. There is no comment section in this file.Otherwise, from and including the line these two files appear to me to have identical content and coding layout.-----------------------------------------------------------------Hope this is helpful.Mike