Best Hawker Hunter for FSX?

[swimeye]

What Hawker Hunter is the best for FSX? Freeware or payware does not matter.
Thanks for any hints. :wiggle:

[letsgetrowdy]

Dave Garwood's hunter Trainer...
Freeware and Pure class!

[conork]

HI
i think alphasim has one , or maybe its flight 1 , dont know :)

google it , ive saw pictures of a nice payware model , i think its alphasim
hope this helps

:)

[Tweek]

Definitely give Dave Garwood's a try. It's free and there's a shed load of variants that come with it.

[swimeye]

Ok, thanks, so Dave Garwood´s Hawker will work in FSX?

[Skittles]

Yes, it's FSX native and very good. Give me 2 minutes and I'll upload a couple of screenshots for you.

[swimeye]

awesome =)

[Skittles]

9166

9169

The image uploader is being a pain in the backside so this is all I can give you. You'll probably think the cockpit looks a little dark. That's because the glass is too dark on this aircraft. There is a fix to lighten the glass and that makes it perfect, I just havn't got around to downloading it.

[Skittles]

http://img708.imageshack.us/img708/6778/2010530193951107.png

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/7623/2010530193638906.png

There's the other two. Screw the uploader. Doesn't work half the time.

Edit: Oh for the love of......

Enjoy the 2 and 2/8's you were given.

[mal998]

Alpha's Hunter is FSX native, has a pretty nice VC and handles really well.


9177 9176
9175 9178

[Gdavis101]

Garwood's Hunter!

[Roger]

Yes Dave's Hunter is the definative in my book and make sure you download the FsX native version as he also did an Fs9 version a few years ago.

[Tako_Kichi]

Don't forget DG did the single seat version as well as the two seat trainer....both FSX native.

[swimeye]

PErfect, thanks for the pictures and Dave´s Hunter looks like a good choice :jump:

[DaveKDEN]

Dave Garwood's single seat Hunter for FSX here;

http://www.cbfsim.net/library/displayimage.php?album=8&pos=9

Cheers,
Dave

[krazycolin]

Alphasims is NOT FSX native. It may have been compiled for FSX but it's not, in any way, made for FSX.

[mal998]

Alphasims is NOT FSX native. It may have been compiled for FSX but it's not, in any way, made for FSX.

That may well be the case, and if so, I stand corrected. However, even if that is the case, it in no way detracts from the model, and it's ability to perform in FSX.

[kilo delta]

Alphasims is NOT FSX native. It may have been compiled for FSX but it's not, in any way, made for FSX.

I'm curious now.....if it's compiled with the FSX SDK (it is isn't it?) then how is it not FSX Native? :)

[Quixoticish]

Alphasims is NOT FSX native. It may have been compiled for FSX but it's not, in any way, made for FSX.

Have you invented some new definition of "FSX native" that the rest of us aren't privy to?

[CheckSix]

I have to admit, in my apparent ignorance, that my understanding of "Native" meant that the model from inception was built for use in FSX with a view to making use of FSX's extras as opposed to an FS9 model being recompiled (using the FSX SDK obviously) to fly in FSX minus some or indeed all the FSX bells & whistles.

Help, can some one educate me... Please O.o :)

[Daube]

We call "FSX native" all the planes that are compiled with FSX SDK, meaning that the plane usually gets the FSX typical graphic features like self-shadowing for example.

On the opposite side, we have the FS9 "port-overs", which are FS9 planes, compiled with FS9 SDK, that work in FSX with minor graphic issues (transparency, props and canopies behind autogen and clouds, etc...).

[CheckSix]

We call "FSX native" all the planes that are compiled with FSX SDK, meaning that the plane usually gets the FSX typical graphic features like self-shadowing for example.


Great! Thank you, now I have a better understanding. :)

[Quixoticish]

We call "FSX native" all the planes that are compiled with FSX SDK, meaning that the plane usually gets the FSX typical graphic features like self-shadowing for example.

On the opposite side, we have the FS9 "port-overs", which are FS9 planes, compiled with FS9 SDK, that work in FSX with minor graphic issues (transparency, props and canopies behind autogen and clouds, etc...).

Precisely. Meaning the Alphasim Hunter is FSX native.

[DaveQ]

Back to the question - Dave Garwood's is free, as good and has more variants (including the two-seater) than the excellent Alphasim version. Lots of repaints are available for both. Andy Ford (Airtrooper) in particular has done lots of naval repaints for the two-seater; available at Flightsim.com if not elsewhere.

DaveQ

[Bjoern]

Alphasims is NOT FSX native. It may have been compiled for FSX but it's not, in any way, made for FSX.

Compiled = Native.


The bells and whistles FSX allows and encourages is another story.

[MDIvey]

I have got Dave Gs model and it is excellent but seeing the pics of the Alphasim one made me order a copy... very aesthetically pleasing Aeroplane the Hunter.

Matt

[guzler]

I've got both Dave G's and Alphasims and like them both. Most of my flying time is in the AS so I guess that makes it my favourite, that said it is payware, and it has self shadowing, so must be 'native'.

If in doubt, get them both !

[Skittles]

Compiled = Native.


The bells and whistles FSX allows and encourages is another story.

Not neccessarily. The fact that if it is compiled for FSX it is 'native' is only by your own definition.

I could equally say that FSX native planes are those designed for FSX - taking into account the lack of limits imposed by FSX in regards to poly counts etc.

I could design a plane for FS2004 within the limitations of the simulator, then at the very last minute chuck it through the FSX export process. I certainly wouldn't call it FSX native.

It's entirely down to your own definition, but if I downloaded what I was told was an FSX native aircraft then it turned out to be an FS95 aircraft made FSX 'native' I wouldn't be too chuffed.

I've got nothing against alphasim's hunter whatsoever, the above discussion is just in general.

[Bjoern]

I could design a plane for FS2004 within the limitations of the simulator, then at the very last minute chuck it through the FSX export process. I certainly wouldn't call it FSX native.

I would.

The "quality" of the model does not matter at all. If you took a FS95 aircraft, animated it, tagged those animations, set up FSX materials for it and exported it to FSX with XToMDL you would have a very low poly, but still FSX native aircraft.
And I'm sure the majority of aircraft designers *will* agree to that!

[Daube]

Not neccessarily. The fact that if it is compiled for FSX it is 'native' is only by your own definition.

I could equally say that FSX native planes are those designed for FSX - taking into account the lack of limits imposed by FSX in regards to poly counts etc.

I could design a plane for FS2004 within the limitations of the simulator, then at the very last minute chuck it through the FSX export process. I certainly wouldn't call it FSX native.

It's entirely down to your own definition, but if I downloaded what I was told was an FSX native aircraft then it turned out to be an FS95 aircraft made FSX 'native' I wouldn't be too chuffed.

I've got nothing against alphasim's hunter whatsoever, the above discussion is just in general.

No, it's not down to anybody's definition.
A native aircraft is a model compiled with the corresponding SDK. It's not related to the amount of details.

Design a simple sphere, without textures,VC, panels or sounds, and compile it with the FSX SDK => it will be FSX native.

Make your own PMDG-style liner with 100% of the systems simulated and shown in the world-sharpest virtual cockpit, compile it with FS9 SDK => it will be FS9 native, FSX port-over, and not FSX native.

There is no interpretation here. Either it's compiled with the FSX SDK or it's not.

[Skittles]

No, it's not down to anybody's definition.
A native aircraft is a model compiled with the corresponding SDK. It's not related to the amount of details.

Design a simple sphere, without textures,VC, panels or sounds, and compile it with the FSX SDK => it will be FSX native.

Make your own PMDG-style liner with 100% of the systems simulated and shown in the world-sharpest virtual cockpit, compile it with FS9 SDK => it will be FS9 native, FSX port-over, and not FSX native.

There is no interpretation here. Either it's compiled with the FSX SDK or it's not.

If we must get technical;

Definitions of 'native;'


characteristic of or existing by virtue of geographic origin
nativeness - the quality of belonging to or being connected with a certain place or region by virtue of birth or origin
being the place or environment in which a person was born or a thing came into being
remaining or growing in a natural state; unadorned or unchangedIf you intentionally design an aircraft within the limitations of FS2004, i.e. applying characteristics applicable to its original platform, then convert it into FSX with the FSX SDK, it is no longer native.

I assume that KrazyKolin thinks/knows that the Alphasim Hunter was originally built for FS2004 and as such has the characteristics reminiscent of such. Regardless of the fact that it could be recompiled as an FSX aircraft, it would not be native. Hell, it could be the best model ever created, with the best VC ever created, with the best FDE ever created, but as long as it was intentionally conceived and designed in line with FS2004's characteristics it can never be FSX native.

I decided to say 'it's entirely down to your definition' to avoid this kind of discussion. Since you brought it up though, you are right - the definition is solid, it's just contrary to your description.

[ijay]

Alphasim Hunter. FSX native or whatever she does look good in FSX
9263

[Tweek]

There is no interpretation here. Either it's compiled with the FSX SDK or it's not.

Precisely. The term 'FSX native' was come up with to describe models that have gone through the FSX compilation process. 'FSX compatible' is the opposite - FS9 models that work in FSX, but haven't been recompiled with the FSX SDK. Bringing up dictionary definitions means nothing, as they're arbitrary terms. They were just adopted by the community to describe the two types of model.

For the record, both DG's and Alphasim's Hunters ARE native models. FS9 models are also available.

[guzler]

In my very simple world, if it has self shadowing, it's an FSX model and it'll do me :salute:

I'm sure someone is going to prove me wrong now and leave me very confused !!!!!

[atf300]

to break this native non native discussion a bit , does any one still have the rhodesian repaints of daves hunter ? i cant seem to find them anywhere

[CheckSix]

They were just adopted by the community to describe the two types of model.

So this "Native" thing is then down to interpretation according to the above quote.

At the risk of being a fly in the ointment I have to agree with Skittles based upon my own assumption that an FSX "native" model would have originated from the creators mind as a pure FSX product from concept to incept.

Ah... My brain hurts with all this back n forth; hey, if it looks good to the individual (non photoshopped) and it flies good who cares if its native or no... Personally I like Dave G's renditions just fine, a lot of character and they fly very well indeed.

P.S. Didn't Jens Ole do the Rhodesian paints?

[peter12213]

I persoanlly couldn't give a toss if it is native or not, Alpha's model looks great, fly's great and has excellent frame rates, as does Dave's though I do prefer Alphasims model!

[Marlin]

The question was the best for FSX right? The question wasn't for a FS9 portover correct?

If the Alpha model doesn't say "MDLXMDLH" when you open the .MDL file with notepad, then it doesn't fit into the category of FSX.

It doesn't matter how good it looks or how good it flies, it still isn't going to have self shadowing, bump maps or any of the things that make FSX FSX.

Terminology is important especially if somebody incorrectly advertises for a payware plane that is going to be deleted because it isn't for FSX.

I have cursed people in the past for wasted money due to the exact circumstances that are shown in this thread.

Please don't say something is FSX native if it is in fact, JUST a portover.

[Kiwikat]

Please don't say something is FSX native if it is in fact, JUST a portover.

3 and a half years after FSX's release, there are still some developers who use false advertising. Not going to name any names. Though in the last year there seems to have been a decrease in the amount of false advertising, so it seems more devs are being honest about it now.

[tigisfat]

3 and a half years after FSX's release, there are still some developers who use false advertising. Not going to name any names. Though in the last year there seems to have been a decrease in the amount of false advertising, so it seems more devs are being honest about it now.


I've noticed that as well, and it used to drive me nuts. Tigisfat has laid a lot of his angers with the dev community down on account of less BS these days.

[mal998]

OK, this comes directly from one of Alpha's model files: RIFF²\ MDLXMDLH @â...


This comes directly from their website:

- full FSX (SP1/SP2/Acceleration Pack) compatibility. Bump-mapping, self shadowing, bloom fx.
- v-c self shadowing with FSX SP2

geez, what else is there? http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/images/icons/icon26.gif

[krazycolin]

Guys. The AS Hunter was built by us along with many others. Yes, it did get some additions and some minor mods from them BUT, that said, the model, as all the models we did for them, was and is NOT FSX native. They were all made for FS9 with those types of poly counts, textures and animations. Phil then took those models (whether this was legal or not is still in dispute) and put them into FSX. We had supplied them with bump maps and spec maps as is our custom but the models themselves were dumbed down from the high end versions that we have and so were not even half the quality of what we, or, for that matter, AS does today.

If you would like a list of those we did for them, we can supply this easily.

My version of FSX native is that if a model is made for a particular product, then it's native. Otherwise, it`s a port. A different kind of port, but a port nonetheless.

[fsafranek]

What's the episode in South Park where Cartman is running around the halls getting all excited because he thinks there's going to be a fight. "Everybody! It's on. It's on." Have to laugh. Nothing else to do. :icon_lol:

A quick check at avsim found a texture pack by Jens-Ole for a Rhodesian Hunter. Search for "hunt_rhaf5.zip". Certainly Jens-Ole's area of interest so I would have thought of him first as well.
:ernae:

[mal998]

Guys. The AS Hunter was built by us along with many others. Yes, it did get some additions and some minor mods from them BUT, that said, the model, as all the models we did for them, was and is NOT FSX native. They were all made for FS9 with those types of poly counts, textures and animations. Phil then took those models (whether this was legal or not is still in dispute) and put them into FSX. We had supplied them with bump maps and spec maps as is our custom but the models themselves were dumbed down from the high end versions that we have and so were not even half the quality of what we, or, for that matter, AS does today.

If you would like a list of those we did for them, we can supply this easily.

My version of FSX native is that if a model is made for a particular product, then it's native. Otherwise, it`s a port. A different kind of port, but a port nonetheless.

OK, so it's a port. Sounds like some personal issues as well. I don't care about the trials and tribulations in the world of developing. Personally, it's none of my business.
I will leave you to your discussion. http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/images/icons/icon6.gif

[falcon409]

What's the episode in South Park where Cartman is running around the halls getting all excited because he thinks there's going to be a fight. "Everybody! It's on. It's on." Have to laugh. Nothing else to do.
Yep, ask a simple question. . . . .and the world will beat a path to your doorstep to debate it, lol.