Another New Harvard...

[Trev Clark]

This time from Sky-unlimited. Looks on a par or better than the AS one, FS9 at present but FSX to follow.
http://www.skyunlimited.net/texans_harvards.htm
Not sure about the crew though..

[T6flyer]

Ummm I noticed this had been released....will have to check it out of course in a couple of weeks time when I return home. I did assist a little with this project so it would be nice to see how it turned out in the end. Previous renditions have IMHO been representations of the type, so it would be very pleasing to have something that flies like the real thing. Best T-6 I have is the now I think 'dismissed' Aeroworx beta - now that was a handful!!

Best wishes to all and thanks for all your kind comments.

Martin

[Imperator]

This time from Sky-unlimited. Looks on a par or better than the AS one, FS9 at present but FSX to follow.
http://www.skyunlimited.net/texans_harvards.htm
Not sure about the crew though..

I just wonder, what make this better than the Alphasim one?

[DaveB]

Hi Imperator..

Word on the street is.. it's not as good as the Alpha one overall. Martin (T6Flyer) flies these things for real so if he's had some input into the FD, you can bet it'll be there or thereabouts but there's a lot more to a model than how it flies ;-)

ATB

DaveB :tab:

[Imperator]

Hi Imperator..

Word on the street is.. it's not as good as the Alpha one overall. Martin (T6Flyer) flies these things for real so if he's had some input into the FD, you can bet it'll be there or thereabouts but there's a lot more to a model than how it flies ;-)

ATB

DaveB :tab:

Hmm :think: , mayby i'll wait to buy it untill we get some reviews.....But still the VC looks great

Cheers

[T6flyer]

Hi Imperator..

Word on the street is.. it's not as good as the Alpha one overall. Martin (T6Flyer) flies these things for real so if he's had some input into the FD, you can bet it'll be there or thereabouts but there's a lot more to a model than how it flies ;-)
ATB
DaveB :tab:

I'm afraid to say that I had no input at all into the Flight Dynamics - all my contributions were to the cockpit and historical details. Am surprised to hear that its below par with the Alphasim version as I was disappointed with that. I'm not going into any detail, but it was a representation....you have to remember that they produce a lot of different aircraft in any one year and so the accuracy isnt going to be 100% every time.

I do have a lot of T-6 time, but its all from the back seat and I as stated before have yet to find something that is actually like the real thing. Its meant to be a trainer and a trainer that sometimes can bite and what we have to date doesnt replicate the characteristics of this classic aeroplane. I'm no expert, its just my opinion.

Within time and when things settle down here (Funeral is next Friday), perhaps I will try this Harvard out (nope thats a certainty...cause its my favourite type) but the only bug bear I have is the Flight1 wrapper. My PC at home is not connected to the net and even after reading the instructions as to a reinstall the machine has to be linked to the net. So its a CD version or nothing at all for me. Oh well.......

Best wishes to all,

Martin

[DaveB]

Hi Martin,

Rgr that mate. I've not actually seen the model in the flesh so to speak so my comment was made on the strength of a friend who has. TBH, he was surprised that it wasn't better given the quality of the SU109 and Hurricane so although I've not 'had a go'.. I trust his judgement enough to take his comments as correct ;-)

Your comment on the Alpha panel is pretty much what most models are like I think.. especially the ones I've worked on. While you are allowed some artistic license, with aircraft that had such a long life as the Harvard.. with any aircraft that had a decent production run, the best you can do is choose 1 and go for that. The general public have to hope that the one you've gone for is the one they like The Hunter panel I did with Sav for DG's single seaters was pure F6.. no additions at all other than the icon panel but this was one particular F6 and a museum piece so may not be fully representative of the type (many aircraft turn up with holes in the panel so museum staff fill the holes!). Always a difficult one mate.. very difficult indeed ;-)

I wish I flew the Harvard more (whoever built it) but as I don't and am trying to get out of the habit of buying models I never fly.. I'm loathe to fork out for the SU model 'just to see for myself'. Be interesting to hear from another source what it's like though

ATB

DaveB :tab:

[T6flyer]

As an external model I stil think the da Silva brothers freeware one takes some beating, especially with the Cliff Presley GMax modified version that I got from (I think) Avsim - search both names to find them.

Be interested in your flight model perceptions Martin. To me, cockpit fidelity is more important than model accuracy, and of the 2d and VC is good, and the FDE accurate, this might be worth more of a goer than the Gotha!

The da Silva one was a worthy replica but being a T-6 purist, I found that the fuselage was a little inaccurate and in particular the lower rear fuselage from the wing towards the tail. Looked ok when the wing was shielding the fuselage, but hey it was free and they spent a lot of time and effort on the project and I can't do a thing, so I cant really comment can I?

I do like a flight model to try and replicate the real thing, as the software we all use is meant to be a simulator. The Aeroworx flight model was spot on and I dont think I ever had time to relax until the engine was turned off. It was always a challenge and thats the way I like it - I've never been one for pointing an aeroplane around the sky (Tim Conrad's Helio Courier is about the one aeroplane I never ever can land properly!). The Harvard is a handful at the best of times and should always be treated with a lot of respect as it can bite, but some T-6s on the sim are so so easy and thats with everything to the right too. I wont be able to fly this one until I get a CD copy and then when I return home from looking after Dad and the Funeral etc.

Best wishes,

Martin

[kikko]

I have seen the plane during a demostration done by friends and I must say that the definitive Harvard / Texan could be a mix of both Skyunlimited and Alpha one.
This new one has good things and worse ones. I don't like textures at all, then in my opinion the eight of the whole canopy group is too tall, the engine details are not the best, the overall shape is quite good, the 2D panel is average, the gear legs are extending too much in flight , the VC is nice but not so nice as I expected, the models (versions) are disappointing because the G model is only modelled with racks under the wings, the Harvard II has no radio must or ADF dome (like in a lot of military post war versions) but has no gear doors (eureka!) , the Mk-IV is available only as racer (!) without military details, the D model is quite OK, all the sounds are good but partially alredy heard, the flight characteristics still seems too easy with the roll rate too slow. The definitive TEXAN / HARVARD still has to come :roll:

[T6flyer]

The Harvard II has no radio must or ADF dome (like in a lot of military post war versions) but has no gear doors (eureka!) , the Mk-IV is available only as racer (!) without military details....... the flight characteristics still seems too easy with the roll rate too slow. The definitive TEXAN / HARVARD still has to come :roll:

Good to hear your comments. I have yet to try her out as you all realise I have other things on my mind at the moment, but in a way am quite looking forward to 'flying' her out to see how she compares to the real thing and also to previous 'replicas'. Time will tell.

From what I have seen at the outhouse and through my old friend Tien Macdonald who is currently beta testing the second batch, we will see a stock military Mk.II or Mk..IIB and also a military Mk.4. The IIB is my favourite sub-type (only flown in 2, the majority of my Harvard time is in the 4 or other variants) and I know that one with the ADF loop and rear mounted aerial is on the cards.

Be interesting to see how she handles too. The AS one I felt was far too easy to fly and didnt bring out the true characterisitics of this aeroplanes. Every landing and take off was almost non-eventful and its nowhere like that in the real thing - was off work for two months once, by not having my straps done up enough in a somewhat violent groundloop (but hey what a way to do it:)).

It seems to be gaining quite a popular machine and I know that the Team who created her, are always willing to listen to constructive views, on which they can re-build the aeroplane into what could be and should be the definitive T-6. Such a great shame the Aeroworx one, never took off so to speak....you all dont know what you are missing

Best wishes to all,

Martin