Looking for info on the IRIS Raptor

[XLR8]

Been thinking about purchasing the IRIS Raptor as its on sale.But would like to know a few things about the plane.As most of IRIS aircraft,to start them up its pretty much all switches.Is the F22 the same or is the the keyboard key to start it up.If no keyboard shortcut,are there like a gazinon switches.As with the tomcat I got (nice plane but just to many things going on)It was one thing after another,with the canopy fogging up,engines flame out,could not get both engines up and running. Is the F22 this demanding?Also seems with most of there aircraft,not all but some the canopy are milky.Is the F22 this way.Is it DX10 preview ok.Any other comments would be greatly appreciated.Or even another aircraft recommendation.

[Ferry_vO]

Just a few keys to start it: 1)switch on the battery, 2)Hold APU switch until APU is at 100%, 3)Select "othr" in the panel below the HUD and 4) use the "Q-start" that now appears just above that panel. Wait until it's started, shut down the APU and release the brakes. No engine damage or cockpit fogging up in this one! The canopy isn't 'milky' but nice and clear. It is a fairly easy and fun to fly aircraft, with some great fictional repaints available.

It is a native FsX model so it is Dx-10 compatible.

[FlameOut]

Well, she is the best F-22 going for FSX. If you like this aircraft in real life, then this is going to be your best shot at getting her into the sky.
On my old little 'puter.... a P4, for heavens sake!...she gives me about the same FPS as I'd say of Dino's F-35, IMO.

I did have one problem though, the pilot's lower flight suit had this anomally when I switched on this little switch.
As you can see, I was in NVG mode and I prolly had the old 195.xx or 197.xx nVidia drivers then. Now I have the 285.62 drivers.
I guess to be fair I need to take her back up. I don't know if a patch was ever released...nor do I remember if I was in Preview DirectX 10 mode :sleep:

53816

[XLR8]

Thanks for the info,sure does sound good.

[FlameOut]

Confirmed, it's a Preview DirectX 10 issue, even with the newer nVidia 285.62 drivers.

It does this in both NVG mode and Day mode while turning on the Console light control.

You can easily get rid of this by clicking on the "Pilot" button on that lower center console between your knees!

[wilycoyote4]

I am asking about the aircraft model not the VC. When the APU is in operation I ask if the 2 APU doors are open ----intake and exhaust-----as a model animation?

[FlameOut]

If I understand correctly, yes.
When the APU is engaged a few little doors on left center fuselage open... and close when APU is turned off.

[wilycoyote4]

thanks flameout, those doors are for the APU intake and exhaust. :applause::guinness::guinness:

now my forgetfulness shows up ----
are there APU sounds for APU startup and shutdown? Not the main engines as there must be sounds for them. I mean the APU sounds.

[FlameOut]

Yes, there are APU start-up sounds and the APU wind-down sounds will fool you into thinking that the engines are shutting off, but they are not.

[wilycoyote4]

Yes, there are APU start-up sounds and the APU wind-down sounds will fool you into thinking that the engines are shutting off, but they are not.

Thanks again, owe you cold ones, :icon29::guinness::icon29::guinness: I've heard Raptors start up coupla times. You're right about the main engines being quiet enough. The APU was noisy with a distinct shutdown sound. :medals:

[FlameOut]

Tally Ho then, she is on a 50 % OFF sale now..... http://www.flightsimstore.com/index.php?currency=USD&manufacturers_id=69&sort=3a

[DaveKDEN]

Tally Ho then, she is on a 50 % OFF sale now..... http://www.flightsimstore.com/index.php?currency=USD&manufacturers_id=69&sort=3a

Quite the bargain at ~$23.00US - SOLD! Just bought a copy.

[wilycoyote4]

Love it, and so cheap too. Just installed the small ---4MB----upgrade to version 1.10
good framerates for my outdated pc.
sounds so good
quite a manual, so I'm reading it carefully
handles nice, made a heavy landing smoothly on first flight
the Iris team has made a hitech hot jet

[airattackimages]

I have to preface my comments by saying that as a repeat Iris customer they make some great aircraft and I really appreciate their work...

I am not a fan of this Raptor at all. The flight model is not what it should be, and other little things as well (the burner effect is just an orange light, no protruding burner effect).

I also own the A-10 (LOVE that plane, except for the grunting and overly iritating bitching betty sounds - got rid of them). The Texan II is another of their very well done aircraft (I was shocked to see it is freeware now). The F-16, not real crazy about it either, but it's still enjoyable to own.

Back on the F-22 flight model, everyone knows the Raptor can perform impressive manuevers. I wasn't impressed with the way this aircraft doesn't come close to reproducing them. It basically flies like an F-15 or F-16. As an example of a very well executed flight model -- the VRS Superbug can reproduce pretty accurately most of the manuevers the F/A-18E/F can perform. I would have really expected and hoped for something similar out of this Raptor.

I am still going to be an Iris customer, I just have had some mixed feelings on a couple of their products. But, seeing as some of their work has also been a definite slam dunk, I am always open to buying again. :salute:

[peter12213]

To be fair you can't reproduce some of the mind bending manouvres in fsx like tail slides and backflips like what you see the SU-37 and Raptor performing at airshows

[airattackimages]

Right, and I didn't neccessarily expect it to do all the manuevers, but the VRS Superbug is fully capable of doing the rapid pitch rate maneuvers and even the loaded roll, to a T. The Raptor should be at least able to match it's pitch rate, but it doesn't.

[warchild]

To be hinest. the raptors flight model was rushed. I didnt have a year to work on it like i have the P-61.. The base flight model is a subset of the flight model i made for an su-37 which never has been developed ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd2weQFRBYw ).
the reason its a subset is because the raptor has only 2D vectored thrust while the SU-37 has 3D vectored thrust, so we had to quickly reduce the capabilities. I'l openly admit that i wasnt satisfied with the flight model i did, but, we were out of time.
Pam

[FlameOut]

Well, I thought I'd revive this thread... my brother who is on the P-3 program had told me about the "last one" rolling off the line sometime ago.
Good to see they've created a little video about it.

http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/cpasley/5513/

[Bone]

To be hinest. the raptors flight model was rushed. I didnt have a year to work on it like i have the P-61.. The base flight model is a subset of the flight model i made for an su-37 which never has been developed ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sd2weQFRBYw ).
the reason its a subset is because the raptor has only 2D vectored thrust while the SU-37 has 3D vectored thrust, so we had to quickly reduce the capabilities. I'l openly admit that i wasnt satisfied with the flight model i did, but, we were out of time.
Pam

Since you admit it was rushed, and that you weren't satisfied with it, maybe you can do some work on it to make it something you'd be satisfied with.

I do have the model, in case you were wondering.

[warchild]

I cant promise anything. Heres why..
I wouldnt be satisfied till it could do a true back flip. Thats also why you havent sen the FDE i developed for the SU-37 that is adapted too Mark Harmons SU-33.

Given one reality its not quite impossible. If it werent for the computer making constant adjustments, these planes would tumble out of then sky. They cant be flown by hand because of their instability. In order to create that instability, I have to oversensitize the controls to the point where they're almost unflyable. in other words, breath wrong and you bank turn or loop. I havent given up. I keep working on the physics ( i dont settle for almost impossible. I'm better than that. ), but, its a long road, and the physics involved didnt even originate in aerodynamics. they originated in meteorology ( called dynamic instability ). from an fsx perspective, they're a bitch.

Now, truth told, the SU-37s characteristics are a LOT more complex that the F-22s, and getting something only partially correct, isnt correct at all in my book.

One thing that occurs to me is to ask where you all have your sensitivity settings for your joysticks. I programmed that plane at full sensitivity. I move the stick, the plane reaponds. Its just a curiosity, but may explain why for some people the plane is too wild, and for others its too tame..

Stay tuned. I'll do what i can..

Pam

[Bone]

ok, fair enough