-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
HAWKER HUNTER MK.58 - SWISSMILSIM
- Thread starter noddy
- Start date
collensr
SOH-CM-2025
I fear the writing is on the wall....
Quick impressions after 10 minutes flying and a back-to-back with Dave's Hunter:
A little disappointing, like their Vampire and Venom the cockpit textures are photos from a well-used museum aircraft and take getting used to.
The instruments are all in Napoleons and most of the text in french.
The manual is here https://swissmilsim.ch/index.php/download/manuel-de-vol-hawker-hunter-mk-58-msfs2024/
All in french but you'll need to learn french anyway to fly it
Dave's Hunter is a pleasanter cockpit in VR and feels nicer to fly, cockpit sounds more convincing.
Swissmilsim cockpit more complex so hopefully more depth to explore and things like the canopy structure more convincing visually.
Should be possible to convert the cockpit to Knots/Feet and English as I did for their Vampire and Venom.
A little disappointing, like their Vampire and Venom the cockpit textures are photos from a well-used museum aircraft and take getting used to.
The instruments are all in Napoleons and most of the text in french.
The manual is here https://swissmilsim.ch/index.php/download/manuel-de-vol-hawker-hunter-mk-58-msfs2024/
All in french but you'll need to learn french anyway to fly it
Dave's Hunter is a pleasanter cockpit in VR and feels nicer to fly, cockpit sounds more convincing.
Swissmilsim cockpit more complex so hopefully more depth to explore and things like the canopy structure more convincing visually.
Should be possible to convert the cockpit to Knots/Feet and English as I did for their Vampire and Venom.
These Swissmilsim guys mean well, making much loved vintage jets availabe for us in MSFS, but unlike the subjects, they should not live in the past themselves when it comes to FS aircraft modeling.... Sorry to say but that's exactly what their models look like, particularly the VC's. Oké for FS9....
Today it shouldn't be *that* obvious which is the VC screenshot and which is a photo of the real pit. Today there shouldn't be *so* much difference between them :
Today it shouldn't be *that* obvious which is the VC screenshot and which is a photo of the real pit. Today there shouldn't be *so* much difference between them :
Apologies, you can get an english manual if you search for it - https://swissmilsim.ch/index.php/en/manual-downloads/#
chrismot
Members +
As the developer of this Hunter, I can understand the surprise at the photorealistic cockpit; I find it harder to understand the disappointment. Because, if you know a little about texturing in MSFS, you will easily understand that it is much simpler and faster to use a tool such as Substance Painter to create “polished” textures, even worn ones, than to make the effort required for photorealistic texturing... And then, when comparing two images, it would be useful to compare two identical cockpits: either the SwissMilSim Hunter cockpit, with a Swiss cockpit, and above all, with the same lighting... You will find many more similarities and far fewer differences! At SwissMilSim, this is a deliberate choice that takes a lot of time!
But matters of taste are very personal, and I respect your feelings. I just wanted to clarify things. And I encourage everyone to take the time to fly, to test the systems, to test the flight model, and if possible with the manual (ten minutes to get an idea of an aircraft in simulation seems extremely short to me...). And we are talking about a simulated aircraft that requires a certain amount of skill and time to adapt to, just like in reality. None of the Swiss Air Force fighter pilots, with whom we have worked very closely, has ever claimed to get a feel for the Hunter in a few minutes! A learning curve is necessary...
Happy flying, everyone!
But matters of taste are very personal, and I respect your feelings. I just wanted to clarify things. And I encourage everyone to take the time to fly, to test the systems, to test the flight model, and if possible with the manual (ten minutes to get an idea of an aircraft in simulation seems extremely short to me...). And we are talking about a simulated aircraft that requires a certain amount of skill and time to adapt to, just like in reality. None of the Swiss Air Force fighter pilots, with whom we have worked very closely, has ever claimed to get a feel for the Hunter in a few minutes! A learning curve is necessary...
Happy flying, everyone!
Dear Chris,
It's just because i'm a big fan of the early jetfighters, naturally including the Hunter, of which i think is amongst the most beautiful jetfighters of all time, i needed to express my feelings about the VC of your very nice Hunter model. But not only that, it's also because it is a commercial model although i haste to say that if you had chosen it to be freeware i would still have had the urge to say something about it. I am sure you will agree with me that, with MSFS and MSFS2024 we have the two most unbelievably beautiful flightsimulation programs we didn't even dare dreaming of half a decade ago. No surprise that at the same time unbelievably beautiful aircraft models became available as well. Something like never seen before in any flightsim program. With my comment i just wanted to point out that it is this particular idiom that is missing in your Hunter VC. I didn't go that far but i can imagine the differtence between your Hunter VC for FSX/P3D and the current one for MSFS20/24 will probabely be hard tell...
Your Hunter can be flown perfectly with the current VC but if we're talking MSFS20/24 we'r specificly talking "Eyecandy". Take a screenshot of the IFE/HB F-14 VC and compare it with a photo of the real cockpit. The difference will almost be impossible to tell ( if the buyer of this amazing F-14 model owns the earlier version the price is about the same as the price for your Hunter...). Maybe you can possibly agree with me that f.i. these are two important issue's that deffinately need to be taken into account. Check out the Shrike F-86 VC, almost the same thing (although not as exceptional realistic as the F-14) and it costs even less than the Hunter...You just can't rule out comparison, Chris. And particularly now with FS24 it has become evident that it is an important element in simmers' choice to buy or not to buy.
Bob Dylan warned us about it already 60 years ago, "The times they are changing".... The times of FSX/P3D and before are waaaaay behind us now, already for about 5 years we have entered an amazingly beautiful new era in flightsimulation. It takes just a few steps on the boarding ladder to climb into some of the native MSFS20/24 Virtual Cockpits to experience the mind-blowing and astonishing difference. PBR is the word, Chris. ( well, one of 'em anyway ;-)
(btw, atm i am following a series of PBR painting tutorials and it finally becomes clear to me why native VC's today look so extremely stunning and real. And just like Blender, it's all freeware, unbelievable really...The time and effort it takes is subsequently also unbelievable...;-)
Cheers,
Jan
It's just because i'm a big fan of the early jetfighters, naturally including the Hunter, of which i think is amongst the most beautiful jetfighters of all time, i needed to express my feelings about the VC of your very nice Hunter model. But not only that, it's also because it is a commercial model although i haste to say that if you had chosen it to be freeware i would still have had the urge to say something about it. I am sure you will agree with me that, with MSFS and MSFS2024 we have the two most unbelievably beautiful flightsimulation programs we didn't even dare dreaming of half a decade ago. No surprise that at the same time unbelievably beautiful aircraft models became available as well. Something like never seen before in any flightsim program. With my comment i just wanted to point out that it is this particular idiom that is missing in your Hunter VC. I didn't go that far but i can imagine the differtence between your Hunter VC for FSX/P3D and the current one for MSFS20/24 will probabely be hard tell...
Your Hunter can be flown perfectly with the current VC but if we're talking MSFS20/24 we'r specificly talking "Eyecandy". Take a screenshot of the IFE/HB F-14 VC and compare it with a photo of the real cockpit. The difference will almost be impossible to tell ( if the buyer of this amazing F-14 model owns the earlier version the price is about the same as the price for your Hunter...). Maybe you can possibly agree with me that f.i. these are two important issue's that deffinately need to be taken into account. Check out the Shrike F-86 VC, almost the same thing (although not as exceptional realistic as the F-14) and it costs even less than the Hunter...You just can't rule out comparison, Chris. And particularly now with FS24 it has become evident that it is an important element in simmers' choice to buy or not to buy.
Bob Dylan warned us about it already 60 years ago, "The times they are changing".... The times of FSX/P3D and before are waaaaay behind us now, already for about 5 years we have entered an amazingly beautiful new era in flightsimulation. It takes just a few steps on the boarding ladder to climb into some of the native MSFS20/24 Virtual Cockpits to experience the mind-blowing and astonishing difference. PBR is the word, Chris. ( well, one of 'em anyway ;-)
(btw, atm i am following a series of PBR painting tutorials and it finally becomes clear to me why native VC's today look so extremely stunning and real. And just like Blender, it's all freeware, unbelievable really...The time and effort it takes is subsequently also unbelievable...;-)
Cheers,
Jan
Last edited:
LOL, Javis preferring eyecandy over realism
? Now I know the end of the world is really nigh! This reminds me of something that happened back in the old Lago-days (remember them?): they published a MiG-21 for FS9 by (I think) a Croatian developer who had the "audacity" to concentrate more on the flight model than the looks (of the cockpit). That dev got torn to pieces by the community and was never heard of again. I couldn't understand the reaction of the community back then. Not to blow my own horn, but I seemed to be one of the few people who respected the developer's choice to focus on other things than the looks.
I have looked at SwissMilSim's products in the past and while some of them do pique my interest (subject wise), I have to agree with Javis that "eyecandy" is (and has always been) an important aspect of the/my buying decision. But if the dev decides otherwise (even after well-meant suggestions like the one above from Javis), I'll respect that and will simply walk away. After all, there are different target audiences and sometimes a dev aims at a market segment that does not include yours truly. Fair enough.
? Now I know the end of the world is really nigh! This reminds me of something that happened back in the old Lago-days (remember them?): they published a MiG-21 for FS9 by (I think) a Croatian developer who had the "audacity" to concentrate more on the flight model than the looks (of the cockpit). That dev got torn to pieces by the community and was never heard of again. I couldn't understand the reaction of the community back then. Not to blow my own horn, but I seemed to be one of the few people who respected the developer's choice to focus on other things than the looks.I have looked at SwissMilSim's products in the past and while some of them do pique my interest (subject wise), I have to agree with Javis that "eyecandy" is (and has always been) an important aspect of the/my buying decision. But if the dev decides otherwise (even after well-meant suggestions like the one above from Javis), I'll respect that and will simply walk away. After all, there are different target audiences and sometimes a dev aims at a market segment that does not include yours truly. Fair enough.
Last edited:
DennyA
SOH-CM-2023
I hate the obsession with visual detail in MSFS, because when the standards were lower, we had companies like Virtavia creating tons of obscure 50s/60's fighters, we had stuff like Tim Conrad's peculiar planes, etc. Now if something doesn't nail the vinyl texture at the top of the cockpit dash or the dirt at the back of the wheel well, it's pooped upon by the majority of the community. I would LOVE it if there was some less eye-candy-perfect stuff available, vs not having those planes at all.
And yeah, i'm far more obsessed with a plane flying convincingly than I am about the textures on the floor behind the seat.But alas, I'm the exception, online at least.
I haven't gotten the Swissmilsim Hunter because the freeware Hunters are plenty for me. But from looking at the screenshots, it's more a stylistic choice than a deficiency.
And yeah, i'm far more obsessed with a plane flying convincingly than I am about the textures on the floor behind the seat.But alas, I'm the exception, online at least.
I haven't gotten the Swissmilsim Hunter because the freeware Hunters are plenty for me. But from looking at the screenshots, it's more a stylistic choice than a deficiency.
Last edited:
Hmmm....obsession, obsession....that's a big word, Denny. If you can try to change that into love i can go along. I do LOVE details, yessir. And i do LOVE MSFS2024 mainly because of that. MSFS is all about details. What's wrong with that ??... There are quite a few Virtavia models to enjoy in MSFS20/24. Personally i am delighted (Ok, so far...judging by screenshots only ;-) about the upcoming Virtavia F7U Cutlass (maybe you came across my comments in the thread about it, i posted some of my plastic model work showing that i'm not lying about my love for details..;-). So far i don't see any PBR texturing in the VC nore the external model and I think that's a real pity. Understandable but still a pity. Phil no doubt thinks that f.i. the VC of the Cutlass looks Ok. And it certainly does. But jump into the IFE/HB F-14 VC and you'd think you're in a different sim... And you're not going to tell me that you hate it, Denny, no, you're not. That's the pinnacle of VC development today, no flightsimmer in his right state of mind will hate that. *ALL* prop- and jetfighter VC's could look this way if dev's just put the pedal to the metal, not stop half way....( you LOVE the Mentor, right ?....;-)
With MSFS2024 devs have a canvas to paint a picture that will not stand out in between all the glorious beauty that can be seen in musea. I'd say please don't stop at Bob Ross.... That's not where this canvas is made for.
Ok, obsessive ?.. Hmmm.....maybe, but aren't we all a bit obsessive when it comes to aviation ?
With MSFS2024 devs have a canvas to paint a picture that will not stand out in between all the glorious beauty that can be seen in musea. I'd say please don't stop at Bob Ross.... That's not where this canvas is made for.
Ok, obsessive ?.. Hmmm.....maybe, but aren't we all a bit obsessive when it comes to aviation ?
Javis, that Hunter cockpit photo you linked was for a RAF Hunter, the Swiss Hunters had moved on a long way.
I'd say the Swissmilsim Hunter cockpit is a very accurate representation of the well-used aircraft in the Swiss Air Museum, which they have access to. As Chrismot says they have put MORE effort into it with photo-textures to reflect that aircraft than would be required to make a newer-looking variant from scratch.
My concern with it is that it is too well worn (and I think the photo-real textures are what make people think 'FSX').
And mostly unreadable to the usual language-challenged Brit, but I'm slowly addressing both issues with a mod...
I'd say the Swissmilsim Hunter cockpit is a very accurate representation of the well-used aircraft in the Swiss Air Museum, which they have access to. As Chrismot says they have put MORE effort into it with photo-textures to reflect that aircraft than would be required to make a newer-looking variant from scratch.
My concern with it is that it is too well worn (and I think the photo-real textures are what make people think 'FSX').
And mostly unreadable to the usual language-challenged Brit, but I'm slowly addressing both issues with a mod...
Thanks Keith, yes that looks great, but it's a photo of the real thing, right ?
That would've indeed been much better for my comparison duo which was just to compare the Swissmilsim Hunter VC screenshot with a photo of a real Hunter cockpit. An overall represention/indication not so much pertaining to details.
What makes MSFS VC's particularly interesting and beautiful is the overall continuity which, by using photoreal textures, may suffer quite a bit. With MSFS photoreal can be achieved by texturing, real photos not necessary anymore.
Last edited:
In my book of FS realism = eyecandy, as a Lawman you should know that, mate. And yes, the end of the world is really nigh but alas not our precious virtual one. It has never been more alive and kicking, hasn't it. Check out this new MD-11 on YT.
Yes, I have seen video's and reviews of the MD11. While it is a good looking rendition I'm personally not so much into tubeliners and TBH, not that much more into warbirds (I know it's heresy to say that at the SOH
). Just like DennyA, my personal interest veers more to military jets of the 1950-1970 period because of all the different looking designs. I also understand the love one can have for a particular aircraft. Personally I would love to see high quality renditions of aircraft like the (N)F-5A, the F-101B (in Canadian liveries) and above all the Mirage F-1. I hope Azurpoly will do that last one since they have connections with Dassault, even though the F-1 looks superficially similar to their Jaguar (which I have). But think of all the beautiful liveries from so may countries the F-1 flew in
(did I mention I'm a sucker for eyecandy?). And before you say it, I'm aware of the DCS-version.I also quoted DennyA's post because he (unwittingly) emphasized the point I was trying to make to you: Alphasim/Virtavia did a lot of different aircraft other devs wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole (and I'm grateful to Phil c.s that they did). But while you got a decent facsimile of the exterior, their cockpits were usually (not always) pretty generic. You knew this beforehand if you bought an Alphasim/Virtavia-product because that's how they rolled: comparatively cheap renditions of obscure aircraft, released at breakneck intervals, but that couldn't compete with the "high end"-models and weren't intended to do so because they were aimed at a different target audience.
Last edited:
redmill
Members +
I've got to fess up and say I've not tried the Swissmilsim hunter, I'm purely basing my opinion on the screenshots and videos available, but it seems to me that photo textures are trying to replace geometry and modern texture standards, which might have worked in the old but nowadays just doesn't compare to even the freeware competition.
Having tried the vampire and venom I'm sure they'll have done a decent job of the systems modelling, but visually I think this leaves a lot to be desired compared to competitively priced aircraft
Having tried the vampire and venom I'm sure they'll have done a decent job of the systems modelling, but visually I think this leaves a lot to be desired compared to competitively priced aircraft
DennyA
SOH-CM-2023
And I'm not criticizing! We like what we like!
I just wish people were more accepting of simpler planes, so that we could get more niche/unusual aircraft like we had in the FSX/P3D days. (Actually, I just wish MSFS had done actually working back-compatibility on FSX/P3D planes -- that would have solved a lot of this.)
Is that in FI pipeline, Paul ?... Fine! But first the B-17, right ?!... ;-)
Me certainly not so much neither, all that FMC hassle (although i have a 'real' one along with a complete 737-800 homepit..;-) but i've always had a soft spot for the DC-10. Still thinking about getting that MD-11...
Really ??..... But the 'N' stands for the Netherlands... Are you dutch by any chance ?.... I am and i'm waiting for any of the F-5 renditions available to turn into a Klu NF-5. ;-)
Nope, you didn't.. (have to say more often i think about it carefully before using it or not...it seemingly has the potency to become a dirty word....;-)
Nah, no need to make a point about Alphasim/Virtavia, Lawman. I know more about Phil and his "Not to be touched by other devs" series of aircraft models than i can tell. I have always thought it was kind of a brilliant idea, producing low priced aircraft models that were not interesting enough for the more 'sophisticated' department of FS aircraft developers. Only a few that did not end up in my FS95/FS9/FSX hangars. Here's a cold-war jetfighter aficionado too, you know (if you're dutch Buck Danny should ring a bell, right ? ;-) Long ago there was a little snag between Alphasim and me but that didn't keep me from enjoying the F80,F84,F8,FJ3,Cougar,Demon,Skyraider,Skywarrior,Skyhawk,Intruder,CorsairII,B-52,B-57,F-102,F-104,F105,F106,F107 etc,and so on, und soweiter.
Ok, in ending one photo then of one (very) obscure craft that i loved very much but did not make it (AFAIK) and did not make it in the RW neither) :
RealFlight, a rather fantastic RC sim is the only means to be able to fly this amazing VTOL aircraft. The model looks great, the sounds are great, the fun is great ! (sorry for going OT)