Best Jet Fighter for P3D?

[MontyPreston 7]

 The VRS F-18 Superbug, Milviz F-4E, and F-100D are the best in my opinion.

 

I wish Milviz would update their F-15 to work in P3D.

 

Unfortunately, the latest Milviz F-4E patch has introduced a couple of glaring bugs, including a faulty gear down indicator (gear appears up when in fact it's actually down and locked), and a HUD alignment/collimation issue.      This normally should be an easy fix for a developer, but Milviz have indicated publicly on their official forum that any fixes will be placed on a backburner as they are currently swamped with other projects.      I personally can't stand this kind of attitude and I would counsel anyone to hold off purchasing the Milviz F-4 package until ALL issues are resolved, however long this takes.    

 

The VRS F-18 is good but not perfect.     Although VRS has accomplished much with their fly-by-wire simulation efforts, it still has certain unrealistic flight qualities such as the nose rising up far too much when rolling out of a high-g turn and the inability to land properly on a conventional runway.      The landing problem is by far the most glaring, and causes the VRS F-18 to essentially flare itself and float very unrealistically when coming into ground effect whilst flying a normal 3.0 degree glide path to the runway.      This problem can be avoided by flying a 'Navy' carrier style glide path of 4.5 to 5 degrees and not flaring the aircraft at touchdown (again, standard Navy carrier-landing), but it's still very unrealistic.     VRS is aware of the problem but insists this behavior is a flight modeling compromise they can't get around.       Ummmm, whatever......

If you're looking for something that can be a challenge to fly, because it's underpowered and will stall without much warning, check out the Lotus L39 like mentioned above. It's fantastic. I love it and am building a sim around it.

 

Agreed.     Although the L-39 is indeed underpowered in terms of a true modern fighter aircraft (it is a purpose-built trainer of course), the Lotussim simulation package is absolutely fantastic.     Beautifully rendered virtual cockpit with full 3D gauge animation and reflective glass faces throughout, very high FPS, and one of the best flight modeling accomplishments ever for the FSX or P3D platforms.      Lotussim is the gold standard as far as I'm concerned.    

[Urshult Haze 4]

Mixed feelings...

Oooooh my god! It's been released! ( VSR Superbug P3Dv3)

Dammmmed it's summer... have no time for this! (Sweden)

 

Feel very sorry for Dino

But should there not be a donation campain?

Not right to pay the bandits.....But not right that everybody in the flight sim comunity is losing all this ether.

(get him a backup HD as well)

[Seria17hri11er 15]

Unfortunately, the latest Milviz F-4E patch has introduced a couple of glaring bugs, including a faulty gear down indicator (gear appears up when in fact it's actually down and locked), and a HUD alignment/collimation issue.      This normally should be an easy fix for a developer, but Milviz have indicated publicly on their official forum that any fixes will be placed on a backburner as they are currently swamped with other projects. 

 

The HUD issue isn't something I'd call glaring.  How do you know these issues would normally be an easy fix for a developer?

 

 

I personally can't stand this kind of attitude and I would counsel anyone to hold off purchasing the Milviz F-4 package until ALL issues are resolved, however long this takes. 

 

 

I'm not sure why you would call this an "attitude."  To me it is a development/bug fixing choice.  They may have a lot of momentum with where they are at on other projects, and so to keep that momentum they aren't going to stop at this time to work on the F-4.  They have stated they do not have the time at this point.  If you don't know all the inner workings going on at Milviz, then your just making assumptions about "attitude."  It's clear you are frustrated, and that is definitely understandable.

 

I would counsel anyone to make their own decision.  Is the gear and flap indication not working a game breaker for you?  If so, wait to pickup the F-4.  FYI, they want to release the fix and Tacpack integration at the same time.

 

 

 

 

The VRS F-18 is good but not perfect.     Although VRS has accomplished much with their fly-by-wire simulation efforts, it still has certain unrealistic flight qualities such as the nose rising up far too much when rolling out of a high-g turn and the inability to land properly on a conventional runway.      The landing problem is by far the most glaring, and causes the VRS F-18 to essentially flare itself and float very unrealistically when coming into ground effect whilst flying a normal 3.0 degree glide path to the runway.      This problem can be avoided by flying a 'Navy' carrier style glide path of 4.5 to 5 degrees and not flaring the aircraft at touchdown (again, standard Navy carrier-landing), but it's still very unrealistic.     VRS is aware of the problem but insists this behavior is a flight modeling compromise they can't get around.       Ummmm, whatever......

 

 

I did not know that.  Thank you very much for that info!  And $120 for that... Yes I know $60 is for Tacpack, but you can't get it without, like I wanted...

 

How are you so familiar with the F-18 performance?

[Dominique_K 10,133]

 

Thanks, appreciated. Mliviz seems  to always give priority to new developments than to update buggy older products.  I  don't know whether this is an attitude  or what but I tend now to wait at least a year after release before considering buying one of their aircraft ... 

[MontyPreston 7]

The HUD issue isn't something I'd call glaring.  How do you know these issues would normally be an easy fix for a developer?

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure why you would call this an "attitude."  To me it is a development/bug fixing choice.  They may have a lot of momentum with where they are at on other projects, and so to keep that momentum they aren't going to stop at this time to work on the F-4.  They have stated they do not have the time at this point.  If you don't know all the inner workings going on at Milviz, then your just making assumptions about "attitude."  It's clear you are frustrated, and that is definitely understandable.

 

I would counsel anyone to make their own decision.  Is the gear and flap indication not working a game breaker for you?  If so, wait to pickup the F-4.  FYI, they want to release the fix and Tacpack integration at the same time.

 

 

 

 

 

I did not know that.  Thank you very much for that info!  And $120 for that... Yes I know $60 is for Tacpack, but you can't get it without, like I wanted...

 

How are you so familiar with the F-18 performance?

 

Ummm, having no way to confirm the gear is down and locked from the cockpit is sort of a deal breaker for me, yah.     Call me a stickler for details.     I'm not quite sure how anyone could overlook this and enjoy flying the simulation???

 

Consider that Milviz released their latest F-4 Phantom patch solely to make the aircraft fully compatible with P3D v3.2.      It normally takes Milviz weeks to bring this particular product up to the latest P3D patch (not a completely new version of P3D of course), and then they break something in the process that was working fine beforehand.     So, not only no new features with the latest patch, but now we have to live with a broken product for months on end if Milviz is indeed waiting until complete Tacpack integration before releasing another patch.  Again, this patch would only fix things that Milviz themselves broke in the first place.     It's ridiculous quite frankly and we, their customers, should rightfully have higher expectations from this developer as the F-4 Phantom is one of the more expensive add-ons currently on the market.    If Milviz would take the time to properly beta test their patches instead of constantly rushing through everything to keep a wide variety of products in development (more profit for them), this kind of thing would simply would not happen.      

 

No other developer seems to have any problem with maintaining a timely and competent compatibility with P3D upgrades as do Milviz with certain products.  I quite frankly feel that potential new customers should be aware of this.       

 

Regarding the VRS Superbug package though, no, I'm not an F-18 expert by any means, but if you research the issues I brought up in the official VRS forums database, you will find confirmation and further explanation there.     Again, potential new customers should simply be aware of the issues in order to make an informed buying decision.     

Thanks, appreciated. Mliviz seems  to always give priority to new developments than to update buggy older products.  I  don't know whether this is an attitude  or what but I tend now to wait at least a year after release before considering buying one of their aircraft ... 

 

Yes exactly.     And you're very welcome!     

[Seria17hri11er 15]

"Regarding the VRS Superbug package though, no, I'm not an F-18 expert by any means, but if you research the issues I brought up in the official VRS forums database, you will find confirmation and further explanation there.     Again, potential new customers should simply be aware of the issues in order to make an informed buying decision."

 

 

Thanks, I appreciate it.  I completely agree.

 

 

 

Ummm, having no way to confirm the gear is down and locked from the cockpit is sort of a deal breaker for me, yah.     Call me a stickler for details.     I'm not quite sure how anyone could overlook this and enjoy flying the simulation???

 

That's fine, I completely understand the first sentence.  I was not criticizing you saying:

 

 

I would counsel anyone to hold off purchasing the Milviz F-4 package until ALL issues are resolved, however long this takes. 

 

All I am trying to say is you have put the information out there.  People can make a decision based off that.  You don't need to "counsel" them.  I'm not trying to argue with you.  I'm just saying as a counterpoint, to everyone else, to make the decision for themselves.

 

 

 

 I'm not quite sure how anyone could overlook this and enjoy flying the simulation???

 

I can still enjoy the F-4 because I know it is a bug and I know my gear and flaps are working properly; I just need to remember what they are set at.  I'm not saying you should enjoy it too because of that.  What one person finds unacceptable, another person may find acceptable--for the time being in this case.

 

 

 

Consider that Milviz released their latest F-4 Phantom patch solely to make the aircraft fully compatible with P3D v3.2.      It normally takes Milviz weeks to bring this particular product up to the latest P3D patch (not a completely new version of P3D of course), and then they break something in the process that was working fine beforehand.     So, not only no new features with the latest patch, but now we have to live with a broken product for months on end if Milviz is indeed waiting until complete Tacpack integration before releasing another patch.  Again, this patch would only fix things that Milviz themselves broke in the first place.     It's ridiculous quite frankly and we, their customers, should rightfully have higher expectations from this developer as the F-4 Phantom is one of the more expensive add-ons currently on the market.    If Milviz would take the time to properly beta test their patches instead of constantly rushing through everything to keep a wide variety of products in development (more profit for them), this kind of thing would simply would not happen.      

 

No other developer seems to have any problem with maintaining a timely and competent compatibility with P3D upgrades as do Milviz with certain products.  I quite frankly feel that potential new customers should be aware of this.       

 

Don't agree or disagree with this.  I do not have enough data to.  Do you have some data you can link everyone to that would support these claims?  In particular

 

 

 

If Milviz would take the time to properly beta test their patches instead of constantly rushing through everything to keep a wide variety of products in development (more profit for them), this kind of thing would simply would not happen. 

 

 

If not, no worries.  It just means 

 

 

[Milviz 919]

Monty, if you're a customer, prove it and I will refund your money IMMEDIATELY.  But I'm betting you're not.

 

Show me the proof please.

[Busterbvi 3]

To the O.P. It depends what you like really, American or British, the Milviz F4 phantom and F15 are superb. The Aerosoft F14 Tomcat and the Just Flight Tornado GR1 are all excellent choices, I have them all. The Razbam Harrier is a cracker also.  If dog-fighting is your thing, take a look at DCS World.

[Varmint007 2]

The VRS F-18 is good but not perfect.     Although VRS has accomplished much with their fly-by-wire simulation efforts, it still has certain unrealistic flight qualities such as the nose rising up far too much when rolling out of a high-g turn and the inability to land properly on a conventional runway.      The landing problem is by far the most glaring, and causes the VRS F-18 to essentially flare itself and float very unrealistically when coming into ground effect whilst flying a normal 3.0 degree glide path to the runway.      This problem can be avoided by flying a 'Navy' carrier style glide path of 4.5 to 5 degrees and not flaring the aircraft at touchdown (again, standard Navy carrier-landing), but it's still very unrealistic.     VRS is aware of the problem but insists this behavior is a flight modeling compromise they can't get around.       Ummmm, whatever......

 

Umm, no, not "whatever." We have approximately 11,000+ forum users and somewhere around 15,000 topics related to the Superbug. Please link me to a single topic discussing this alleged issue with unrealistic "ground effect" behavior, as surely it must be very prolific and prominent based on your description. Have you personally posted to this issue in our forums? Are you actually a customer?

 

 

Jon Blum

VRS

[MontyPreston 7]

Umm, no, not "whatever." We have approximately 11,000+ forum users and somewhere around 15,000 topics related to the Superbug. Please link me to a single topic discussing this alleged issue with unrealistic "ground effect" behavior, as surely it must be very prolific and prominent based on your description. Have you personally posted to this issue in our forums? Are you actually a customer?

 

 

Jon Blum

VRS

 

Looks like Avsim is going to censor me if I dare to not praise every single add-on out there, so I'm not sure what good it does to even reply on these threads anymore.     I'm actually a customer though Jon, and I'm also aware you'll likely censor me on the VRS forum if I were to reveal my order number.      But you're denying the VRS F-18 essentially  flares itself and floats unrealistically in ground effect when flying a normal 3.0 glide path to a land-based runway???     You actually responded to this issue being brought up several times in the VRS forums and told every person in the respective message thread(s) that this was a flight model compromise VRS had to accept?       Are you now publicly denying this?    

 

How about you post a video response of a VRS F-18 flying a 3 degree glide path to a conventional runway with the flight controls MFD displayed in the cockpit and show us how what I say is untrue?     Simply fly a normal land-based runway approach (non-carrier), flare the aircraft normally, and post a video.     You'll sure make me look the fool!     

[jabloomf1230 2,445]

 

 

Looks like Avsim is going to censor me if I dare to not praise every single add-on out there, so I'm not sure what good it does to even reply on these threads anymore.  

 

Why would AVSim censor you? Jon Blum just wanted to disagree with your statement. Maybe you should respond, since he did ask you whether you had a copy of their product. When I read your original post in this thread, I just assumed that you were a real life FA-18 pilot, or at least you were at some point.

[MontyPreston 7]

Monty, if you're a customer, prove it and I will refund your money IMMEDIATELY.  But I'm betting you're not.

 

Show me the proof please.

 

 

I see you've already managed to get my original reply to you here deleted, so I'll let what I've already written stand.      Maybe you can explain to new customers why your F-4 Phantom is broken and why it will take many months to fix.....

Why would AVSim censor you? Jon Blum just wanted to disagree with your statement. Maybe you should respond, since he did ask you whether you had a copy of their product. When I read your original post in this thread, I just assumed that you were a real life FA-18 pilot, or at least you were at some point.

 

Good question, but they have deleted a reply I made to Milviz on this thread.     Maybe Avsim can explain why?      I responded to Jon Blum and asked him to prove my statements false.     

[vc10man 732]

 

 

Just Flight Tornado GR1

Just bought it today. Great aircraft.

[hs118 707]

Just finished reviewing 20+ pages of search results at the VRS forums for the words "glideslope" or "glide slope". No mentions (at all) of problems with shore based recoveries, in fact, just a couple of posts about using ILS with airports. Almost everything was about carrier recoveries.

 

Here is a thread where some ground effect claims are made but other posters point out why the technique of the pilot may be the issue. Also the account making the claims has a familiar tone.

 

http://forums.vrsimulations.com/forums/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=2819&p=21027&hilit=ground+effect#p21027

[iamlmc 2]

Monty, if you're a customer, prove it and I will refund your money IMMEDIATELY.  But I'm betting you're not.

 

Show me the proof please.

 

@MontyPreston

 

Dude if your a customer... What more could you ask?   

 

I have hundreds of € on "broken" add-ons were customer support is very poor or simply nonexistent... How I wish they could act just like Milviz!

 

Regards,

Luís