New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
Moderators: Guru's, The Ministry
- DaveB
- The Ministry
- Posts: 30457
- Joined: 17 Jun 2004, 20:46
- Location: Pelsall, West Mids, UK
- Contact:
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
Fascinating.. yes Brian but I don't think it'd make anyone a pile of money.
As for the Vulcan and MP..
I don't use the vast majority of what's offered on the models I have so a new, all singing Vulcan sporting everything inside that the real one had would be completely wasted on me. Does it look right.. does it fly ok.. does it sound ok? These 3 points are what I've always looked for in a model and the fact a model might have a working H2S radar and could fire stand-off nuclear weapons with a full 'live' crew sitting in the back under MP would be completely incidental. I wouldn't not buy a model because it could do this but I wouldn't buy it just because it could either.
For any new Vulcan to enjoy even a partial success (however that might be measured) it would have to exceed what the Iris model offers by some degree and I really don't think the target audience is out there. Something a lot less featured 'overall' (though in reality.. hardly less difficult to produce) like a Victor or the mostly forgotten Valiant would more fit the bill for me.. if it looked right, if it flew ok and if it sounded ok
ATB
DaveB
As for the Vulcan and MP..
I don't use the vast majority of what's offered on the models I have so a new, all singing Vulcan sporting everything inside that the real one had would be completely wasted on me. Does it look right.. does it fly ok.. does it sound ok? These 3 points are what I've always looked for in a model and the fact a model might have a working H2S radar and could fire stand-off nuclear weapons with a full 'live' crew sitting in the back under MP would be completely incidental. I wouldn't not buy a model because it could do this but I wouldn't buy it just because it could either.
For any new Vulcan to enjoy even a partial success (however that might be measured) it would have to exceed what the Iris model offers by some degree and I really don't think the target audience is out there. Something a lot less featured 'overall' (though in reality.. hardly less difficult to produce) like a Victor or the mostly forgotten Valiant would more fit the bill for me.. if it looked right, if it flew ok and if it sounded ok
ATB
DaveB
Old sailors never die.. they just smell that way!
- spatialpro
- Concorde
- Posts: 663
- Joined: 10 Apr 2007, 20:18
- Location: Wessex
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
Dave, you have confirmed what I suspected, that a full-fat operational Vulcan wouldn't be enough of a USP to better the IRIS Vulcan and that most of the extras wouldn't be used by most simmers.
I see the other V-bombers have received mentions! I reckon these would generate more interest, given there are no good FSX/P3D alternatives out there, full-fat operational or not. I tend to favour the Valiant, as the one which actually dropped our A and H bombs and also the one which saw extensive use for aerial survey across the globe with 543 Sqn on behalf of the old Directorate of Overseas Surveys (a DOS, it certainly wasn't!) and others. If I could get H2S AND aerial cameras operational it might prove enough to keep me motivated to finish and complete! I also suspect the conventional layout would make flight dynamics easier to program. All that having been said, given my % of qualification and airfield WIP (see previous posts) I don't see myself in a position to start.
I see the other V-bombers have received mentions! I reckon these would generate more interest, given there are no good FSX/P3D alternatives out there, full-fat operational or not. I tend to favour the Valiant, as the one which actually dropped our A and H bombs and also the one which saw extensive use for aerial survey across the globe with 543 Sqn on behalf of the old Directorate of Overseas Surveys (a DOS, it certainly wasn't!) and others. If I could get H2S AND aerial cameras operational it might prove enough to keep me motivated to finish and complete! I also suspect the conventional layout would make flight dynamics easier to program. All that having been said, given my % of qualification and airfield WIP (see previous posts) I don't see myself in a position to start.
Formerly "Airtrooper"
i9-10900KF, 64Gb RAM,
RTX 3090, HP Reverb G2, Win10 Pro 64-bit
Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals, Saitek X52 Pro
- DaveG
- The Gurus
- Posts: 7804
- Joined: 23 Jun 2004, 18:05
- Location: in a deep, dark hole somewhere.
- Contact:
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
I'd love to see a high quality Victor. The Valiant never really gripped me though. The Iris Vulcan could do with a VC makeover in my opinion. Some better, higher res textures would be welcome.
Dave G.
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
Not the best quality, but I enjoy all of them in FSX. I don't know if they all flew together at air shows, but they look good to me. As for dropping bombs, that doesn't float my boat, but it would probably sink it.
- DaveB
- The Ministry
- Posts: 30457
- Joined: 17 Jun 2004, 20:46
- Location: Pelsall, West Mids, UK
- Contact:
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
Nice shots Den
Agree about a more hi-res VC in the Vulcan. The gauges are already ok but the rest is a bit.. umm
ATB
DaveB
Agree about a more hi-res VC in the Vulcan. The gauges are already ok but the rest is a bit.. umm
ATB
DaveB
Old sailors never die.. they just smell that way!
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
I would love to have a Vulcan for FSX but the task would probably take years before it is finished and even then the costs would be incredibly high if a rear working crew were installed and even cost a small fortune to buy!!
interestingly, I read the book Vulcan Test Pilot written by Tony Blackman and Roland Falk when he became the first test pilot for the Vulcan, had suggested that it should be fitted with fighter type sticks because the cockpit was so small it would have been almost impossible to have a standard type control wheel fitted and with a control wheel, it would be necessary for it to be removed before the pilots ejected to avoid breaking the pilots' knees.
Once when Tony Blackman was going to return to Woodford after the Farnborough Airshow his wife Margaret did not fancy going home by train so Tony flew the Vulcan back with his wife in the co-pilots' seat. Good job she wasn't a back seat driver!!
Regards
Nigel.
interestingly, I read the book Vulcan Test Pilot written by Tony Blackman and Roland Falk when he became the first test pilot for the Vulcan, had suggested that it should be fitted with fighter type sticks because the cockpit was so small it would have been almost impossible to have a standard type control wheel fitted and with a control wheel, it would be necessary for it to be removed before the pilots ejected to avoid breaking the pilots' knees.
Once when Tony Blackman was going to return to Woodford after the Farnborough Airshow his wife Margaret did not fancy going home by train so Tony flew the Vulcan back with his wife in the co-pilots' seat. Good job she wasn't a back seat driver!!
Regards
Nigel.
I used to be an optimist but with age I am now a grumpy old pessimist.
- DaveB
- The Ministry
- Posts: 30457
- Joined: 17 Jun 2004, 20:46
- Location: Pelsall, West Mids, UK
- Contact:
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
Nige..
The current Iris Vulcan is already FSX matey
ATB
DaveB
The current Iris Vulcan is already FSX matey
ATB
DaveB
Old sailors never die.. they just smell that way!
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
My Vulcan is the Phoenix model, and having Googled, there is a long thread in CBFS forums from 9 years ago discussing the PSS version.
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
Thanks Dave, put it down to me age!!Nige..
The current Iris Vulcan is already FSX matey
ATB
Regards
Nigel.
I used to be an optimist but with age I am now a grumpy old pessimist.
-
- Concorde
- Posts: 1459
- Joined: 30 Aug 2006, 18:21
Re: New Avro Vulcan: A discussion
Some idle thoughts.
You don't actually need a new external model. With P3Dv3 and higher you can use SimConnect to attach SimObjects to SimObjects, e.g. bombs to aircraft, and indeed detach them although the ballistics will assume no drag unless you control that. I'm guessing you could just attach TacPack weapons and then use that for everything after release.
For the VC you could either, model a complete new one with working stations for the Nav, AE, and whatever the third position did. Or you could have 2D panels covering those positions and update the textures for the rest of the VC. With the amount of work to actually model the lower cockpit and animate all the switches etc. I'd suggest 2D panels are actually more likely to work without hitting some limit on the number of animations etc. and give less of a frame rate hit.
Certainly that would be easier than redoing the whole aircraft, give you what you want in terms of operating the complete aircraft rather than just flying it, and assuming you didn't alter any of the base package would presumably be okay to sell as an add-on to an add-on.
You don't actually need a new external model. With P3Dv3 and higher you can use SimConnect to attach SimObjects to SimObjects, e.g. bombs to aircraft, and indeed detach them although the ballistics will assume no drag unless you control that. I'm guessing you could just attach TacPack weapons and then use that for everything after release.
For the VC you could either, model a complete new one with working stations for the Nav, AE, and whatever the third position did. Or you could have 2D panels covering those positions and update the textures for the rest of the VC. With the amount of work to actually model the lower cockpit and animate all the switches etc. I'd suggest 2D panels are actually more likely to work without hitting some limit on the number of animations etc. and give less of a frame rate hit.
Certainly that would be easier than redoing the whole aircraft, give you what you want in terms of operating the complete aircraft rather than just flying it, and assuming you didn't alter any of the base package would presumably be okay to sell as an add-on to an add-on.