AH Hawker Hurricane MK1 Released 5/2

Could one/several of you Hurricane owners test something for me, please.

One of the comments I've seen ( on Facebook, I think ) concerned take-off performance. She said that she'd got the aircraft off the ground before the airspeed indicator had come alive. This wasn't from AvAngel, by the way, but another of our simming sisters. I think the response from AH was that they would investigate. I am very cautiously considering the Hurricane, as it's a favourite aircraft in real life, but I've come across this take-off problem with AH before, so her comment caught my eye.

So, could some of you do a few take-offs, fully laden and in still air, and post your thoughts here, please ? No matter how much you like the Hurricane, or are loyal to AH, please be honest, for and against.

Thanks in advance. As a reward, here's a picture of seven airworthy Hurricanes gathered together at Duxford in March 2023. Including the fibreglass 'gate guardian' and the real one in hangar 4, a total of nine on site during that exhibition.

ewmcWpn.jpg
 
That was the original FM, which was pretty dodgy and did just float off the ground quicker than the gliders I fly in RL!
If you put in forward trim and a bit of forward stick to lift the tail then it lifts off at about 75 depending on fuel load after a reasonable ground run.
With the stick held back it will come straight off at about 60, maybe less, go nose high, drop a wing and kill you...which is fair I think...
One problem is I can't find a way to see what trim you HAVE got set so you need a feel for it.
The ASI needle moves pretty much straight away but the first marking is 60.
Still got a few faults but I now like it a lot and it's all I'm flying (this week) :)
 
Test
keithb77 said:
That was the original FM, which was pretty dodgy and did just float off the ground quicker than the gliders I fly in RL!
If you put in forward trim and a bit of forward stick to lift the tail then it lifts off at about 75 depending on fuel load after a reasonable ground run.
With the stick held back it will come straight off at about 60, maybe less, go nose high, drop a wing and kill you...which is fair I think...
One problem is I can't find a way to see what trim you HAVE got set so you need a feel for it.
The ASI needle moves pretty much straight away but the first marking is 60.
Still got a few faults but I now like it a lot and it's all I'm flying (this week) :)
Click to expand...

Thanks Keith - glad to hear it was sorted out. Still considering it carefully.
 
Feeling annoyed by this purchase. I really want to love it, with its superb sound set (inside and out) and fairly accurate flight model (except on landing), but the textures, especially the exterior, really let this one down. And that's not to mention the inaccuracies in the cockpit modeling, such as the incorrectly-modeled instrument panel shroud and overly-big/out of proportion control stick/grip (easy to see when comparing to any of the numerous cockpit photos and videos available online).

Here is Hurricane R4175, as just one example, though all of the paint schemes contain most of these issues:

First of all, the serial number has one too many '1s' on the port side. The style of the type face used for the serial numbers is wrong (a modern font being used). It's missing the 303 Sqdn. patch that should be painted on the port-side fuselage (above the 'RF' code). The fuselage roundels are positioned wrong and are of the wrong type. The complete maps leave large sections of the fuselage with either shiny or completely dull sections without any reason for it. Almost none of the fasteners on the cowlings or fuselage side panels have the correct colors to match the camouflage paint (it's complete BS to make the wartime rush/replacement excuse). The antenna masts and windscreen mirror are painted incorrect colors (they should all be painted to match the camouflage paint where they're located). I'm also big on attention to color accuracy, and the colors of the fuselage roundels (which don't match the tail flash) and completely-black serial numbers, really look jarring.









1716126543073.jpeg

Additionally, the port-side gun bay doors are missing the fasteners that the starboard gun bay doors have. And, conversely, some of the fasteners present on the fuselage side panels on the port-side are missing on the starboard side. These are issues that also seem present on all of the models.



 
Last edited:
@Bomber_12th I don't have a Hurricane, I just saw so many mistakes on screenshots and videos, especially in the repaint schemes, that I decided it was just out of my league. AH also has a very strange approach - they actually wrote it themselves - that it's just a game and they have no intention of making 1:1 historical copies, although I consider these to be basic mistakes. What's the point of having a great car if half of the paint is shiny and half is matte with different shade? It would upset anyone. Not to mention issues in letters, codes, markings or camouflage. It spoils the effect for me. They react to constructive criticism with some kind of aggression and do not admit they are wrong and will fix it, or they simply write that they have other sources but cannot provide them. They have very cool ideas and that's why I like them, but they lack (and they simply don't want it) the ambition to simply be a better company on the simulator market. Although there are some gems. Overall, if the models were $19-23 each (because that's how I value them), it would be ok. I spent a lot of time with AH models and had a lot of fun, but you have to keep your mouth shut because it's always a big unknown. Anyway, Bomber, you know what I mean, you're even more freak than me. ;)
 
Reading the above comments regarding paint issues, yes the same situation exists in my beloved Chipmunk, with wrongly-sized roundels especially. But, I wonder if some talented repaint artists could refer to the previous couple of posts and create some corrected markings for us all to enjoy?
 
I see what people mean by the fuselage going from shine to matt. How odd. Still tempted if further work is done, however.
 
It's just a matter of a bit of inadvertency krept in while assigning material params to the fuselage textures. While 'HURRICANEMID_ALB.PNG.DDS' got its eggshell finish, 'HURRICANENOSE.ALB.PNG.DDS' and 'HURRICANEMIDREAR.ALB.PNG.DDS' did not and were inadvertedly added with matte finish. Possibly caused by "we need to get the Hurricane out the door now in a hurry to make room for the Lancaster"... :p

One *could* ask oneself why wasn't this picked up during betatest. . . Not a biggy at all but with a lot of impact.

Tip for devs: release a new aircraft model with just one texture set (so enough time to concentrate on the materials), provide a very good paintkit with the package and let the repainters do the rest. (excuse me, not doing repaints anymore, i don't know if repainters have any control over material here in MSFS...if they do, a Hurri dedicated repainter could take care of the fuselage material mix-up (or more if applicable)

@ J.Case : isn't it like fabric can be painted in gloss- or eggshell shine colors just as metal surfaces can ?.......
 
Might be fixable in the CMP files, don't know.
I think it's a consequence of very-high-res textures - the fuselage files get split into 4, was much easier to be consistent when there was just one file.
And syncing serials and roundels across two files is a pain...as a VR only flyer high-res textures are just a waste of disk space!
Whilst grumbling at AH, I do wish they would test in VR - it's a great way to find problems in the geometry of the aircraft - there are several incongruencies in and visible from the cockpit that stick out in VR which they obviously didn't notice testing in pancake mode.

But all that aside it's a great aircraft that probably no one else would do and I'm enjoying it :)
 
keithb77 said:
But all that aside it's a great aircraft that probably no one else would do and I'm enjoying it :)
Click to expand...
You said it ! I do wish most or preferably ALL of the imperfections and oddities that John has meticulously summed up will be fixed. She certainly deserves it ! Have to say that looking at the screenies in John's post initially i had to look twice if it was the real thing i was looking at or the model.... Despite the imperfections and oddities AH certainly must've done something quite right ! :encouragement:
 
@Javis - I was hoping for this discussion - thx : how do you control glossiness in the world of PBR were metalness/roughness seems to be the way to go ?

If one suspects that I know barely enough to be dangerous ............. you're probably right - BUT I'm learning :running::rocket:
 
J.Case said:
@Javis - I was hoping for this discussion - thx : how do you control glossiness in the world of PBR were metalness/roughness seems to be the way to go ?
Click to expand...
Well, afraid i'd have to say that for me PBR still means something like Possibly Beyond Reach atm....I still spend all my MSFS time on what it's really made for : virtually flying.. They shouldn't have made it so unmeasurable beautiful, shouldn't they. Atm i can't be of any help unveiling the secrets behind the wonder that is PBR.

Btw, i was talking the real thing about paint shine either on metal or fabric. As you can see here there's no difference at all between the metal front fuse and fabric aft fuselage. Just a nice satin shine all over :

courtesy D.Harbar.jpg If you really want to find out about the appliance of PBR material in MSFS there's a plethora of texture and material tutorials about these specific subjects waiting for you outthere. You could f.i. start with this :


Good luck!
 
I just can't stop looking at that pic of the 7 Hurris (and the 2 Hawker bipes) in the hangar. What a scene. I was at Flying Legends 2000 which I think was the first time 4 Hurris flew together in the modern era. At that time, there was not a single Mk.I airworthy anywhere. Now we have gatherings like this. All my life I've been watching more and more classic warbirds be restored/recreated and wondered how long it can last, and am now starting to be hopeful that it can last longer than I will.

August
 
K5083 said:
I just can't stop looking at that pic of the 7 Hurris (and the 2 Hawker bipes) in the hangar. What a scene. I was at Flying Legends 2000 which I think was the first time 4 Hurris flew together in the modern era. At that time, there was not a single Mk.I airworthy anywhere. Now we have gatherings like this. All my life I've been watching more and more classic warbirds be restored/recreated and wondered how long it can last, and am now starting to be hopeful that it can last longer than I will.

August
Click to expand...
I've also seen four together - we might have been at that same airshow. If anywhere, it would have happened at Duxford, most certainly. The Hurricane exhibition in the picture was quite an event, August. I went twice.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top