Just Flight Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Just Flight Products > Hawk T1/A Advanced Trainer
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - about JF and their failed Hawk
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

about JF and their failed Hawk

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
snoopy1951 View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 7
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote snoopy1951 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: about JF and their failed Hawk
    Posted: 26 Aug 2016 at 9:02pm
I must say that it sounds a little strange that Rich (the chief on the Hawk project) can keep holiday, while all of us who have bought a project which still don´t can be used as it was intended, instead it might have been better he had stayed at home and helped finish the updated/service pack we are waiting for here, it is more than 1 months ago I bought the Hawk and still can´t use, what I have paid.
This might sounds like I am angry, but no I am more disappointed and will look more careful in the future, before I buy something from JF again.
Snoopy51   
Back to Top
Martyn View Drop Down
Just Flight Staff
Just Flight Staff
Avatar
Development Manager

Joined: 31 Mar 2008
Location: Huntingdon, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 7104
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Martyn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2016 at 8:09am
Hi Snoopy. I appreciate your frustration however everyone is entitled to holiday, and the project is not simply put on hold because he is away. Work has been going on regardless of his absence and the update should be available within the next few days.
Martyn
Just Flight Ltd
Back to Top
kevinfirth View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 07 Aug 2016
Location: Kidderminster
Status: Offline
Points: 15
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kevinfirth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2016 at 8:27am
I can wait a few more days for the update, its really insignificant compared to other events in the world, and like Martyn says, everyone is entitled to some holiday :) The comms from JF are very good, we know theyre looking at it :) Calling it failed is a bit strong for me... K
Back to Top
Jeremyh View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jeremyh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2016 at 11:09am
Hi.

Can someone please explain why I cannot get this aircraft to turn in the air. Its as though the aerilons dont work.

Please advise.

Jeremyh
Jeremy
Back to Top
Jeremyh View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 16
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Jeremyh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2016 at 11:14am
I dont feel people are being fair to Just Flight. These modern add ons are very complex, and I am yet to see one that does not have teething issues. I just want mine to turn in the air.
Jeremy
Back to Top
226OCU View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2016
Location: Tasmania
Status: Offline
Points: 15
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote 226OCU Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27 Aug 2016 at 1:57pm
Please note, the Hawk is not an add on where you get in press a button to start the engine and take off. It is a complex simulation, not a game.

I have had no problems in starting the engine, doing the checks and getting the aircraft to fly from RAF Valley, down the Llanberis Pass at 50 feet and recovering to Valley as per the book.

Thank you to JF for a fantastic product, where there is a challenge to understand aircraft systems and then correctly apply the knowledge. The more like the real thing it is, the more I like it!

I love this little Hawk.....
Rick
Back to Top
BillC View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 25 Jul 2016
Location: Formby, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BillC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28 Aug 2016 at 8:27am
Originally posted by 226OCU 226OCU wrote:

Please note, the Hawk is not an add on where you get in press a button to start the engine and take off. It is a complex simulation, not a game.

I have had no problems in starting the engine, doing the checks and getting the aircraft to fly from RAF Valley, down the Llanberis Pass at 50 feet and recovering to Valley as per the book.

Thank you to JF for a fantastic product, where there is a challenge to understand aircraft systems and then correctly apply the knowledge. The more like the real thing it is, the more I like it!

I love this little Hawk.....


Hey Rick !

I agree with you 100%

How these talented chaps have the patience to create these fabulous, detailed, complex aircraft (just bought the FSL 'Bus also), I dunno.

Well done to the crew.Clap

I used to do quite a lot of programming in Assembler. Now, my limit is a little XML programming for my EGOW scenery. So I can guess how frustrating programming can be.

This is a fantastic aircraft - I just love it. I know that JF and the crew are going to correct its teething problems, so I'm patient.

An interesting point - I used to spend weeks at a time some 600' above Caernarfon - I'd sit on the patio with my bins and watch the Hawks on their training flights. They very often flew over me at about 200' AGL on their way down the valley (and also F15's/Sea kings piloted by 'Royals' ).

Anyway, I love this bird. Can't wait to get it sorted.

Regards
Bill


BillC
0.9nm SW R03 EGOW
Back to Top
neilG View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 06 May 2013
Location: Cambs
Status: Offline
Points: 46
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote neilG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Aug 2016 at 5:28am
I'm glad these things have been said. I must say I was getting rather confused at some of this negativity. A little like the Tornado , there were some really quite angry comments which at the outset was perhaps more understandable (even if not terribly constructive), but later on, the expectation of Tacpack aside (which I also have been a little disappointed at the absence of), was hardly justified when you consider that this is one of the most complex, lovingly crafted, beautifully modelled aircraft for desktop flight simulation that exists. The boundaries were being pushed, something that I personally appreciate, with regard to the level of realism and complexity that can be representated, and I think that such things are always likely to bring problems and in this case 4 service packs. It seems to me that the same level of fidelity belongs to the Hawk which I must confess I never found to be anything like the basket case - far from it - that some comments have suggested. Those who know something of DCS will know something if the difficulty experienced modelling the Hawk in that, which model I have to relate is still undergoing improvements after two years. The only thing I wish of JF at the moment with regard to these matters would be that I would like to read more progress posts than we get just to know what is going on, even if it is a short 'we are still working on .....but there is nothing new to report just yet' . Lastly, I think that there have now be three absolutely remarkable military jet models thus far, the Canberra, the Tornado and the Hawk, each of which, far from suggesting that JF have lost their way, actually would indicate to me that they are alive and very well and pushing the hobby forward.
Neil
Back to Top
mkjordan View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 02 Aug 2016
Location: Cologne
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mkjordan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29 Aug 2016 at 4:28pm
I'm also happy to see positive posts about the Hawk, maybe JF need to do a"lite" version for those who want a stable plane which will still fly straight with no hands on the joystick!
I watched videos of the real thing which appears to jolt around needing constant small movements of the joystick to hold the Hawk steady. I tried the same and it works great with the JF Hawk too and must say I enjoy every minute of flying the Hawk.
I agree with those who complained at first about no check lists & no Tutorial, I also spent my first evening frustrated until the people in this forum came to the rescue.
I also look forward to the update (there are some bugs) just please don't turn it into a fancy looking standard FSX plane.
On my part congratulations for this great & exciting addition to my hobby.
M. Jordan
Back to Top
BillC View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 25 Jul 2016
Location: Formby, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BillC Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30 Aug 2016 at 3:10pm
Originally posted by Jeremyh Jeremyh wrote:

Hi.

Can someone please explain why I cannot get this aircraft to turn in the air. Its as though the aerilons dont work.

Please advise.

Jeremyh


Jeremyh..

I don't see any response to your startup query. Found out yet how to get your airlerons working ?

I had the same problem - it is not immediately obvious. You need:

1. Reality settings at 55% or above.

2. Reduce your stick settings to about 25% sensitivity

3. Follow the startup procedure as explained by Henk Schuitemaker on this forum:

http://forum.justflight.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=30854&title=hawk-start-problem

If you still have problems, yell. As I've found, there is always someone here who can help.

Regards
Bill
0.9nm SW R03 EGOW

i7-3770K 4.7GHz, Corsair H100, Asus P8Z77-V, Mushkin 16GB 1600MHZ DDR3,
GTX 970 4GB, Corsair 120GB SSD, Seagate 1GB HD, OCZ 750W PSU, Corsair 550D Case,
Win 7 64bit, Dell U3011 30" monitor, CH Yoke & Pedals, T.16000M stick

ICOM 8500
AOR AR 8200 & AR8600 Scanner for 'Live' ATC
Realistic PRO-44
Racal European Approach Plates (4 vols)

..and a flight attendant's uniform for the missus...unworn



BillC
0.9nm SW R03 EGOW
Back to Top
andyleigh View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 09 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 15
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote andyleigh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2016 at 4:11pm
Im sorry I have to disagree.
Is the hawk a complex add on?
That depends on what you term a complex add on. It seems to be a full simulation of the Hawk and its systems, which is long awaited. I can't tell at the moment how well the systems work because i have only flown it two or three times because of the flight model. But if we accept that all the systems work as they should. The Hawk itself is actually a simple aircraft when compared to say a Tornado, or a 737 NG or a A320. So although JF should be applauded for creating a jet trainer with all systems simulated, lets not get carried away. Its a Advanced trainer, and as such is fairly simple.
Now the flight model
MK Jorden. Dont confuse buffeting from turbulence close to the ground with instability. Most pilots actually don't fight this kind of buffeting, its like a car going over bumps in the road. It rarely effects your direction of flight to much and only needs a little adjustments. But a small jet traveling at 420 knots has a lot of inertia it will travel in a straight line despite the buffeting at low level. In fact if you do a low level flight in the JF Hawk it feels like its flying OK because you are constantly changing your altitude. But if you try to fly it in a cruise mode at 6000 feet or even 25,000 feet its impossible to trim for level flight. Even hands on trying to keep it level it will swing wildly from -4000 fpm to + 5000 fpm.
I actually like the JF Hawk. Its a lovely exterior model the systems are nice I want to fly it. But I can't fly it in a realistic manor with the flight model in its present condition.
In my mind the flight model wasn't finished. not even close but it was released any way. And now there seems to be no urgency in getting a good flight model out fast. I hope everything gets fixed because I really want to fly this add on. But I think this is the last JF product for me. Two rushed products is enough to put anyone off

Back to Top
mkjordan View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 02 Aug 2016
Location: Cologne
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mkjordan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Sep 2016 at 10:48pm
Hi andyleigh,
I think we really need the opinion from an experienced pilot who has flown the Hawk. Those movements are not fighting to keep control but light movements of correction, I do not like simulations where you can let go of the joystick and the plane keeps in stable straight flight, the real thing would certainly not.
It's not turbulence close to the ground, it's updraft from the hills/mountains on low level like in the videos.
I've spent a lot of time on forums where mostly real pilots take active part praising the product & inexperienced people who have never flown the real thing were complaining as they couldn't fly it!
I keep an open mind until I hear from someone who has flown the real Hawk. I can fly the JF Hawk  & so can some others in this forum.
I enjoy my expriences with this plane & am happy to see I'm not the only one, but I also have hardware that allows me to control the air brakes & more which increases the stability ;-)
The settings of the hardware also makes a big difference.
Give the hawk a little more time than 2 or 3 flights it might surprise you.
M. Jordan



Back to Top
saunder View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 23 Jul 2016
Location: Plymouth
Status: Offline
Points: 10
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote saunder Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2016 at 7:59pm
I suppose we have to put it into perspective. If it was a real Hawk how far would we get before it was in many pieces scattered along the ground. With practice it is manageable which probably points to it being quite an accurate flight model.
Back to Top
mkjordan View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 02 Aug 2016
Location: Cologne
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mkjordan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2016 at 8:21pm
Originally posted by saunder saunder wrote:

I suppose we have to put it into perspective. If it was a real Hawk how far would we get before it was in many pieces scattered along the ground. With practice it is manageable which probably points to it being quite an accurate flight model.


I agree, although as I said I'm keeping an open mind, I'd like to hear what a real Hawk pilot thinks Wink
We forget that a real RAF pilot has training that costs 1 or 2 million Pounds (I forget which) to fly these things.

Watch the Red Arrows and you will notice they nearly always use the airbrakes, the Hawk is more stable with correct use of the airbrakes.

I'd recommend the use of a registered FSUIPC4 so you can use a switch to control the airbrakes, increasing or decreasing a little as you need

M. Jordan
Back to Top
helix1250 View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 22 Jun 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 30
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote helix1250 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Sep 2016 at 8:59pm
I'm sorry I have seen people claiming that this flight model is accurate. Total hog wash in my opinion, I can hardly believe a true Hawk pilot uses airbrake sin standard flight to stabilise the hawk!

The FDE was rushed and now they are trying to correct it, but us punters have parted cash for a pretty looking part finished sim.

I look forward to an update, but I'm already turning blue in the face and I'm not sure I can hold my breath much longer!
Back to Top
mkjordan View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 02 Aug 2016
Location: Cologne
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mkjordan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2016 at 12:18am
Originally posted by helix1250 helix1250 wrote:

I'm sorry I have seen people claiming that this flight model is accurate. Total hog wash in my opinion, I can hardly believe a true Hawk pilot uses airbrake sin standard flight to stabilise the hawk!

The FDE was rushed and now they are trying to correct it, but us punters have parted cash for a pretty looking part finished sim.

I look forward to an update, but I'm already turning blue in the face and I'm not sure I can hold my breath much longer!


Look on You Tube & you will see that the Red Arrows & all other formation teams use airbrakes regurarly during standard (formation) flight
Back to Top
andyleigh View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 09 Jul 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 15
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote andyleigh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2016 at 6:14am
Ok I'm not a Hawk pilot
I'm not Evan a fast jet pilot
But I have held a private pilots licence for more than 10 years. All aircraft (except fly by wire fighters) are designed to be inherently stable. That is that if trimmed for climb cruise or descent they will stay on flight path and wings level with minimum input from the pilot until weather conditions change that.
The Hawk is an advanced trainer. To be a good trainer it would need to be a stable platform. It's called an advanced trainer not becouse it is dificult to fly. But becouse it has more systems for the trainee pilot to manage. It's faster so reaction time and decision time is less. And it's used to teach acrobatics maneuvers and combat maneuvers. But if the trainee pilot was constantly fighting the controls he could never master all the other things.
The suggestion that air brakes stabilize the aircraft is crazy and shows a complete lack of knowledge of basic flight. Air brakes have one use and one use only. To create more drag.
Often used on approach becouse aircraft like the Hawk are slippery and don't like to slow down. To make speed more manageable on approach if you put out the speed brakes the aircraft will slow down almost instantly, when the throttle is reduced instead of over many minutes if the air brakes where not out.
If you have seen aerobatic teams using air brakes when flying in formation it's for the very same reason. To create drag and there for more control over speed when trying to stay lined up with another aircraft.
The basic fact is. In still air properly balanced and trimmed any aircraft should fly reasonably strieght for a short period of time. Not go from +5000 fpm to -5000fpm.
Why don't you load up FSX take off in the JF Hawk climb to 19000 feet and try to travel in a streight line within + or - 100 feet of altitude for ir 30 minutes. If you was flying in IFR with ATC that's what is required. In the hawk you would struggle to stay within 2000 feet of your assigned altitude and you would have no ability to do any other tasks in the cockpit such as change freq or look at your charts.
I once tried to tune the nav radio in the JF Hawk in level flight AT 10,000 feet in level cruise trimmed as best I could. It only took seconds to tune the freq. when I looked up all I could see was ocean. I was in a full Jose five heading for the sea. I only just managed to pull up. This aircraft has an awful flight model and is no way accurate.
Back to Top
petesmiffy View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff
Avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2015
Location: Grantham
Status: Offline
Points: 38
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote petesmiffy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2016 at 11:14am
The only real problem with this Hawk is that it isn't fun to fly.
It's very nice to look at and that's all.
On the realism side, every air base has its "hanger queen".
Back to Top
Pete Burnup View Drop Down
Check-In Staff
Check-In Staff


Joined: 03 Sep 2016
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pete Burnup Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2016 at 7:59pm

This is my first post having just joined the forum because of the problems with the Hawk.


I looked forward to the release of the Hawk as it looked in the development stage to be a really excellent aeroplane. The aircraft itself is a marvel and full credit to the JF team for producing an aeroplane as close to the real thing as possible.


So when it was released I took a chance and purchased it, although I realised that my computer was not really up to the spec required. Unfortunately the frame rates were very low.


So I have just spent over £400 upgrading hardware, Gigabyte 990X, AMD FX8370E Black Edition, Sapphire Radeon RX470 4GB. I run FSX on its own 128gb SSD drive. I have tried various fixes to increase frame rates but to no avail. The hawk on my system remains unplayable.

I have the JF Lightning F6, Canberra PR9, Aerosoft Lightning X and F6, also their F16. Plus the SSW wonderful F104S and G. They all have their very different flight characteristics, with the F104 particularly challenging at low speed. However they all have one thing in common, good frame rates.

Where the problem with the Hawk as to the low frame rates exists I have yet to discover. I fully understand that the JF recommended spec is I5 3.2ghz and that my FX8370e is not on a par with the I5, but not all of us can afford the Intel route. So it seems those of us who cannot afford an I7 based computer in the future will not be able to purchase a Just Flight product because our machines will not be powerful enough. Not sure that makes good commercial sense. Surely it is possible to sacrifice some aesthetic features for better frame rates.


At the low frame rates I get it is impossible to give a really good appraisal as to the flight dynamics. To me however it does not feel correct and needs attention, but I agree with the comment above about it being tested by a real Hawk pilot. Hopefully improvements will come with a service pack issue, together with (please JF) an improvement on the frame rates.


As regards the comments above about the airbrake. As far as I am aware the Red Arrows fly at times with the airbrake extended so as to maintain a higher throttle setting. There is therefore an instant power increase when the airbrake retracts instead of waiting for the engine to increase rpm for more thrust.

Back to Top
Slopey View Drop Down
Moderator in Command
Moderator in Command
Avatar
AirHauler Developer

Joined: 11 Jun 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 8273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Slopey Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 Sep 2016 at 8:13pm
I don't own the Hawk, but the AMD FX8370E isn't exactly a speed beast - it sacrifices speed for power efficiency.

As FS is CPU heavy, you've got an ok GPU with a sub standard CPU, so your CPU will be limiting performance.

I wouldn't expect decent frame rates from that processor with anything but default aircraft.  The more complex add-ons from most publishers (Carenado/PMDG etc) will suffer the same issue.

Sorry to be negative, but for FS, you need more CPU than GPU in reality, whereas you have it the other way around.
AirHauler Developer
For AH2 queries - PLEASE USE THE EA Forums as the first port of call.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down