So, lots of comments yesterday and barring unforeseen development problems we’ll soon have PMDG in the market, and as stated by PMDG yesterday the primary objective for this team is to get one “under their belt” – to make a successful, trouble free conversion – one that works flawlessly in the X-Plane environment. Their 738NGx frankly may not be a good candidate for this first conversion simply due to the depth of systems simulated, not to mention the steep learning curve this team may face as they confront unforeseen issues. As The Man said, we’re gonna have to take the long view here. The important thing to file away in long-term memory is that PMDG is now a player in the market, and that brings a whole lot of muscle to X-Plane that wasn’t there a few days ago.
Funny, but I’d have been as excited to learn that AeroSoft was going forward with a conversion of their A320 series, or if Captain SIM had seen the light and was moving forward with converting their stable of aircraft, but PMDG brings a lot of firepower to the argument that X-Plane 10 her Arrived in the Big Leagues. We can’t take these things for granted of course, but again, the possibility looks better now than it did a few days ago that other MsFS developers may see the light.
Still, the community of developers already working in X-Plane has been hard at work for years – yes, years – readying the next round of new ACF releases, and the first of these new aircraft will soon be upon us. We’ll have the Leading Edge DC3 and Saab on our desktops in the not too distant future, and both IXEG with their 733 and Fly-J-Sim with their 727-200 will be entering the contest later this year, and there’s still a possibility that XPJets may turn out to real (and not some illusory, semi-mythological beast perpetually lurking in shadow) and release their 777 (but really guys, even a new screenshot might be nice every once in a while…you know…like “proof of life”?). Carenado might release a semi up-to-date ACF too, but I don’t think we could stand the pressure, do you?
If all these aircraft were to release over the next half year I doubt any of us would know what to do with them all. I mean, think about it? How long do you really think it’ll take you to master the Saab or the 733? A few weeks? Well, dream on! These are going to be hard core procedures SIMs and it’s gonna take weeks just to crawl through their manuals! With just the products mentioned you could spend years, and I mean years, working through these systems simply getting proficient, so the real problem is going to be twofold: deciding which of these ACF to buy, and which to dedicate the majority of your time to.
The beauty of the PMDG announcement is in knowing they’re out there, that we have PMDG level products in the pipeline, and we can factor that into this buying calculus. You can study up on Boeing systems, get familiar with the 737 series with the IXEG 733 and EADT 738, and even the 727-200 as a precursor, then transition smoothly into a PMDG 73x when it comes along. This course of study could easily fill up years of your life too. You could focus on turboprops instead, with the Fly-J-Sim Q whetting your appetite, then the Leading Edge Saab your next step up on the way to a PMDG turboprop.
The point here, if I may, is that you can buy all these ACF and probably have a blast with each, but to get lasting satisfaction, and perhaps a richer return on your investment of time from this hobby, you’re also going to want to really “get into” one or more of these birds.
The path you choose is irrelevant, but just look at the possibilities suddenly arrayed before you. The next few years in X-Plane are going to be richly satisfying for users and developers alike.
One last thing to share here, and this is a biggie. The folks at PMDG advise that Prepar3d, the Lockheed Martin SIM based on FSX technology, will NOT be a consumer oriented SIM.
Let those words sink in for a moment, then let’s look at some new files.
+++++
And speaking of PMDG, that mysterious “secret” new ACF was announced late Sunday. Take a look:
You’ll find more information here.
+++++
FlightTime56 will have a more in-depth review of this ACF soon, but I thought it best to throw my two cents in for now. First this is a major update to Stekeller’s original 748i, and as he’s now a part of SSG we’ll need to get used to calling this ACF by that new name. Next, this revision brings the 748i into the highly recommended category, and you’ll want to give this one a try. Third, this is still a beta and shouldn’t be considered a final release, but even so in it’s current form it IS a lot of fun and it DOES work well in XP10.
Note: this ACF is getting fairly complex and you might need a set of instructions to use with this ACF; luckily you’ll find one here. Also note that the SSG website is a good resource for more information on this ACF too, and that a few first impressions are in order here: the “aircraft” does indeed feel like “a heavy” and is very satisfying to fly; systems are deeper than before, enough to make this a pleasant chore to operate. A/P and NAV/comms are up to the job but are not custom systems. Clarity of the PFDs is really very good, and information displayed there is much more detailed than generic 744s usually have onboard in XP. All in all, this revision is a recommended addition, good for a long Sunday afternoon run from SeaTac to München!
Wing detail is improved a lot, by the by, but gear detail is still fairly basic.
Still, this is turning into a stunning looking ACF:
Again, look for more from FT56 soon.
+++++
There’s an interesting looking ZSSS Shanghai Hongqiao International Airport scenery in the DM (above) and it opened in XP10 – but with OSM errors all over the place, including streets and houses in the middle of a runway, and I couldn’t get the file to open in XP9…I gave up after a long string of errors and crashes from library objects in the error logs, yet I’ve got all libraries on board and up-to-date. My concern: I just updated to the “new” OpenSceneryX – and all of a sudden a lot of airports that were trouble free are now posting errors on load.
Then the same thing happened when trying to open another new airport, ENRY Rygge, and I’m not sure what’s going on but I opened this one last week when v1 of the file appeared briefly at the Org. This latest is the second version, and it’s a nice looking airport too. Images here are in v10 of course, but this file just will not open in XP9 for me and crashes the SIM when I try. It opened in XP9 last week, before I updated OSX, so I’m not sure what the error is but to quote Han Solo, I have a bad feeling about this.
This second version is a planned release, and a third is slated as well. It looks grand in XP10 and fits in nicely with all the other Norwegian airports we made in our Q-flights last autumn (routes highlighted in second image, below).
And here’s the airport in XP10.
We’re looking forward to seeing how this WIP/beta turns out, and hopefully the developer will make a v10 compliant version too, because that may be all I can use! v10 lighting will look splendid here, so here’s hoping!
+++++
This latest KRNO | Reno, Nevada bills itself as slated for XP10 only, and that’s a fair assessment. Textures appear a little stretched on the terminal buildings so clarity suffers a bit, but there are XP10 compliant elements incorporated so this one looks quite decent in 10, especially at night.
XP10 compliant lighting is on hand here, and the Jetways used at SeaTac are as well:
This airport could use a little more action on the ramps, as well as smaller buildings around the runways to give it some depth and scale. Otherwise this is a promising revision for XP10.
+++++
woweezowee forwarded this information to us: a new upload at AvSIM of FACT | Cape Town, South Africa for X-Plane. It’s an .exe file and of an Aeroworx conversion, and the file name is “ awxFACT.zip “. It appears quite nice, and hopefully mainstream distribution can be arranged.
+++++
Now let’s head over to Ontario, Canada for Jacques Brault’s latest:
CYOO Oshawa is located in Toronto, on the NE side of town, and it’s a smallish GA airport that’s well done overall and worth a download. Here’s the location:
And that Stearman in the last airport image above? Paolo’s latest, and a very nice file it is!
Good engine detail and a very fun ride…what more could you ask for? Well, an excellent 3D cockpit for starters, and a gorgeous livery comes standard too!
+++++
One of the most under-rated 737s in X-Plane is the X-Plane Freeware Project’s 737-700, and here’s a new Alaska Airlines paint for this bird, and an image of the 3D pit thrown in for good measure. Alaska flies a huge fleet of 737s over a network that covers the western US and Mexico.
+++++
negonn’s latest for the QPAC 320? Korean carrier Asiana Airlines! Another excellent example from his growing collection for this ACF, and this carrier flies a huge route network.
+++++
negonn also fired off this “final” ANA 787 DreamLiner paint.
“final” in that this MAY be the livery they’ve settled on for the rest of the 787s in their fleet. This one is excellent too, and we’ve got several ANA paints for this aircraft too…but never really can too many, can you? This is another airline with a vast, and growing, network of destinations.
Well, that be all for today. Lot’s going on, lot’s to dig into, and we’ll be back as soon as we’ve got something new. We’ll see you then, but thanks for coming along with us today. C&S
The Cloudmaster looks nice. Not what i was expecting from PMDG, but a nice surprise anyway.
And technically, i wouldn’t consider PMDG player in the market till i see images or a video of one of their aircraft in X-Plane. Till then we only have their word. Even then, images in the sim still doesn’t count as a real product till it is released. One thing is certain however, PMDG have a lot of FSX fans, and hopefully, the successful conversion of one or any of their aircraft to X-Plane will help out the X-Plane market by hopefully drawing their fans our way. Or am i just to hopeful?
Jack… agreed, this could drive a few more converts XPX’s way but yes; as they say, the proof is in the pudding. FWIW, I’m still putting my faith (and $) on established dev’s that have proven themselves with good products that I like to fly. Loyalty is a big deal to me, as is top notch customer service, and our small stable of aircraft developers have always been spot on IMO.
Chip… nice to have you on top of the news though. Much appreciated!
Bamboo Cougar
Jack, keep in mind that PMDG has stated that they will continue to develop in FSX for the next few years. Even if they jump to XP, most of their customers are hardcore FSX simmers that have spent hundreds or thousands of $$ in add-ons. I think it will be very tough to convince them to jump over…. when the same (PMDG) product is available in FSX…. this to me is an exit barrier for FSX simmers….
Now I hope that PMDG convinces other big devs to start developing in XP…. that is what we need.
Yeah, so bad most simmers are not like me. I to have hundreds, if not close to a thousand dollars in add-ons for FSX. But it took me only a day to switch to X-Plane. Was so sick of those slow frame-rates!
Any attention the X-Plane community gets from developers in FSX is a good thing.
Thanks for the kind words on the SSG release.
We are very happy with the Beta (some of us wanted to bake it longer, but at some point you have to kick the chicks out of the nest), and I would like to address the landing gear issue specifically. As we were getting ready for release, we remembered that the landing gear was from the default X-Plane 747-400, and we were trying to remove as many original parts and textures as possible. So, we got rid those gear objects and felt that the current gear would do while permitting the X-Plane community to put the aircraft through its paces.
We also had an internal “argument” about gear length and tailstrikes that took up a lot of our time. So, the current gear is rudimentary, but of course, all parts will be modeled properly as we move forward with development. We are very excited at the response we have been getting, and we have big plans for the future.
- Stekeller
SSG
@Stefan: I don’t know what your plans are for the panel (3D, etc) but I think at some point a widescreen 2D panel would be a plus to have as an option
Ramzzess will be giving a 10% discount if you buy the beta version of his 757!
Oshawa is not located in Toronto….
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oshawa
It is it’s own city, and forms one of the anchors of the golden horseshoe that goes from Oshawa to St. Kits/Niagra falls around the shore of lake ontario.
Okay, how about a “separate” city entity but contiguous to Toronto? Will that work?
Sure. It’s Toronto’s neighbour. Just not IN toronto
roger that!
I’m very proud how the SSG b748 has been received by the XP community !
Few months ago when i was invited to be a partner of this group i said to Carlos “i don’t know too much about Boeings” specialy B748-i then Stefan sent me a mail that he told me :
I know about this plane and you know about planes and some graphics stuffs and i can provide all needed to this project growup.
Then it grew up whith Carlos making flyght tests , me doing some tecnical designs and 3D objects and stefan testing and providing any infos needed about it.
Thats is really incredible how much information Stefan found about this plane and now i can say i learnt so much about b748-i and 747-400.
i cannot leave to say how important was fly that to me one of the best ACFs to XP “Gary’s 747 classic series” that could open my mind to the Havy Metal Airlines universe.
Many thanks for FlightTime56, Falconf16, Carlos, Stefan and sure Dr Gary Hunter.
Sorry Ricardo Bolognini (bolinho1)
SSG
Hi Chip:
About the panel – we did agonize about this one. We like the way the x737 folks have created a widescreen panel, but I believe we are limited because of the large overhead panel in terms of overall panel size. In any case, a 3D panel is planned, so this may take care of some of those issues. Another option is the use of pop-ups for panels such as the overhead and pedestal, freeing up screen space for a larger forward panel. But this is definitely a Beta, and we are working these things out, sort of like building the house while we are living in it at this point.
There is so much to learn, it’s unbelievable. And Bolinho1, thank you – we could never do this without you!
- Stekeller
SSG
“….the community of developers already working in X-Plane has been hard at work for years – yes, years – readying the next round of new ACF releases, and the first of these new aircraft will soon be upon us….”
Ok, I couldn’t resist this one:
I am really sorry to be the one who can’t keep his mouth shut on the subject of aircraft for xp but pleeeaaseee: with all due respect to xp aircraft makers, we’ve been reading this for years – yes, years, and it’s getting harder and harder to take this seriously. Can we please just have some new (or improved existing) aircraft, payware or freeware, no matter, while we are still reasonably young?!
We now have a reasonable b747 for xp10, but I note with concern we never got one of this quality for xp9 in all of xp9′s existence. I won’t mention suspended MD-80 development for xp9 as it was apparently coming in xp10 and – surprise surprise – it didn’t.
I won’t even mention I’m still on a (very respectable) xp9 because xp10 is still beta (at $70+!!) and still not many aircraft – I have to say that’s some beta. Talk of clouds, weather and scenery is all fine and well but I just want to aviate first, then navigate, and now communicate my disappointment. No good having great clouds if the real weather is clear, and I have no decent airliner to fly in the first place.
And please, no cheeky comments referring me to fsx if I’m not happy with xp. That’s the trend on .org, and I find it somewhat offensive..
Cheers,
For Jack and I, we are working as fast as we can, it’s not an overnight process. We need to learn the aircraft as well as, if not better than pilots to make it properly. We release news as soon as we have something we feel is worth sharing, and when we do it will hopefully keep people excited with what we are doing. Just a bit longer before you hear from us. I promise.
I appreciate that as does everyone else. I mean that. After all, from what I gather very few of us here are children and when we express disappointment it is not meant to be hurtful or abusive. On the contrary.
But you must also appreciate that the track record of promises made versus those delivered is not outstanding. I’ve been excited and then disappointed too many times. We have people waiting on aircraft since x-plane 7, 8 and 9 and STILL living in hope. That is absolutely ridiculous, but it also reflects faith and loyalty to an otherwise great platform.
So we are now in a situation where people are getting barred from shoutbox on .org, or from .org altogether simply for either expressing disappointment, frustration, or just regret they have xp in the first place. Yet we / they persist because we believe (not contrary to) in the product, we support the product, and have nothing but faith and hope in the developers, and their products…. IF and when they come..
So with all respect, I will not be holding my breath.
@Rob: you’ll never be banned from posting here. We don’t really do that, okay? We don’t go in for the whole censorship thing as that’s counterproductive to sharing constructive ideas. People have ups and downs, good days and bad…and we get that. That said, maybe you’re a relative newcomer to the blog and haven’t read some of our more infamous rants about the snails pace of development in XP. Of XP itself, of ACF, of scenery. We’ve upset people everywhere, and I mean everywhere! Yes, we hear you, and we share your frustration, but we have a heightened sense of the state of development here and feel sure that things are about to change. No, ten new files won’t release next week, but when we look at the shortfall of significant new releases over the past 12 months there were a few highlights…the CRJ, the Q, the SSJ, the c300 to name a few that spring to mind, so all was not a total loss. Carenado’s coming paved the way for big change, and I think a few years from now we’ll look back on that event as a pivotal turning point, but there ARE several big ACF in the final stages of development, and there ARE several new, important scenery files in alpha right now, so things are happening. Think of it this way. All this lack of development corresponds to a lot of developers who aren’t making as much money as they’d like to, and this isn’t a good situation for them either. They lay it all on the line in what is at best a speculative gamble and hoping the market will support their dreams, but they have to “get it right” or it was all for nothing. “Getting it right” is where we’re at right now with a few critical projects, but even so it’s possible that something calamitous will hit one of them and the file will never release. It hurts us, sure, but can you imagine the pain on the other end? I’ll finish up here by saying that your venting anger and frustration here is important. It’s as important as glowing praise. Developers need to have a clear grasp of the state of the market, and no one profits from silence. C
Sent from the dark side of the Moon.
I think you know where I’m coming from. But reality is that we DO have people suffering in silence BECAUSE they love the product, it’s potential, and all it is capable of, and they ARE looking forward to the AIRCRAFT. So they are staying with XP, hoping, by now many even praying?!
I accept that money talks and bs walks. Having said that if money is the only issue, we know most loyalists will pay for the darn things, BUT let’s finally have them. I did mention “payware or freeware”, but please just give us choice, AND range, and as hyped.
Ironically, we wait and hope. That’s loyalty. I’m not even venting. But it has to be said. Loyalty doesn’t last forever, and many of us have had less patience with more important things.
Also it’s not me you need to worry about. I vent, but I’m still here, because I care. How many have given up? Just saying it as it is..
@Rob: again, we’ve written as much so agree with what you say. I was almost there, had told Simon that if XP10 delayed past Christmas I’d have to reconsider what the blog was going to be
Lusting eh? hehe That makes me feel funny.
Now, I see where you are coming from Rob, for sure. As a developer as well i see the other side of things. It truly does take a long time to do thing. Even longer if you want to make it 100% perfect. I think one of the problems with some developers is they start a project, and then realizes they cant make it 100% and then drop it. They do this instead of just making it 80% done for example.
I in fact could have held off releasing my Q400 till i had everything i wanted in there, like an FMS, better MFD, better textures, more liveries. but at some point you have to release it. Else it will never get released.
What i am saying is some developers get in over there heads and quite either from being discouraged or just become board and want to do something else.
There are a few developers out there that strive to have a product at 100% done, either because they think it is the only option or they need to feed their ego. Some even have real life responsibilities that out way their need to develop a plane. And others just lack the skill and willingness to learn.
Id like to eventually get the Q400 to 100%, but you all can enjoy what it is now till that time. And i think you all are happier for it.
Hey, maybe i am wrong, who knows.
Ah, another point i wanted to make is. One of the reasons why i haven’t shown any images of the 727 as of yet is because i wanted to make sure, absolutely that this is what i wanted to do. That the 727 is what i know i can compete and wanted to make and spend hours upon hours on in the first place.
So perhaps developers need to hold off on releasing images and promising you anything until they are sure. But then again we know you guys nag us over and over until we show you anyway. A bug game of tug-a-war, lol.
@Jack: right or wrong? In a way the market decides those questions, but as you’ve mentioned what’s most important here concerns happiness. Are you happy with the Q? Are your customers? Most of what I’ve seen and read about the Q leads me to believe that your customers are indeed very happy. Personally, I don’t think any developer can ask for more or do better than that. When a developer releases an “80%” file, as long as he or she is up front about it, and as long as promises to update are kept, it’s kind of a “no harm – no foul” event. Perfection is something to strive for, but a terrible obsession if it clouds your judgment to the overall picture, and Jack, you nailed that right on the head. We’ve had the Q for almost a year and we’re better off for it. Better because that’s a year of happiness pocketed in people’s memories, and better still because you’ve kept to your word and revised the Q. A win-win situation. So for what it’s worth, I think you were right. C
“”Ah, another point i wanted to make is. One of the reasons why i haven’t shown any images of the 727 as of yet is because i wanted to make sure, absolutely that this is what i wanted to do.”"
You’ve left that decision a bit late haven’t you considering we, the public are aware you’re doing the 727?
Deciding what to show/not show should be something you do BEFORE the paying herd is aware of it.
Chip – you’re right.. “hopeless romantics, here we go again…” is probably the most appropriate thing to write here.. But you mention xp10 again, and I’ll vent again – I’m still on xp9 because it’s a pretty thing that works. I don’t want a supermodel that doesn’t, and I know most of us feel the same
Jack – everything you said is understood. However, a 100% by x-plane standards is unachievable, and let’s face it, if we want 100%, we’d all be flying the real thing by now!
Rob, funny thing is I’m getting better performance in 10 now than in 9. EHAM, EDDM, KSFO, KMIA
Copy that – but I’m sticking with 9 for now. This thing is not a toy, took me a year to just start getting comfortable with all it’s features…..and…. it….. works.
xp10 is a beta, and like most mortals I prefer less fiddling and tweaking.
Let’s not detract from my original beef though which was that, at this rate, we’ll be at xp11 and I’ll still be waiting for airliners promised two to three years ago.
This is definitely the intelligent mans’ “sim” and all the comments are always correct in their own way. BUT at some stage (last year??!) I just want the……..aircraft. I don’t want to be still hoping for them by the time xp12 arrives..
You said yourself, as long as people complain, you have positive feedback. Notice complaints are less frequent.
Let’s see what happens when the IXEG 733 releases for XP9!
Jack – another thing; we don’t nag you for pictures of upcoming, soon to be released super dooper flying things – we nag for the real thing, at least the real zip file I can use in sim world.
Chip – your last comment sums it all up. Manage expectations better, underpromise, overdeliver.
Managing expectations is a two-way street.
I know at least one helicopter dev who overpromised, underdelivered, (and in my case UNdelivered) and then buggered off to his next project, leaving me out of money and helicopter-less after four months.
I’d like to see more consistent customer service from these devs, because no matter how good the acf, my money’s not going anywhere them if their service is third rate.
Jack:
I absolutely think you should do the 727. It is a classic and popular aircraft. It also has/had a beautiful quality bordering on art like my favorite, the 747.
As for screenshots, it helps others gauge at what level the airplane will be. If the screenshot shows an aircraft that is highly detailed and faithful to the real thing, it will set expectations that the entire aircraft will be of that quality. An example would be the row of vortex generators on the vertical stabilizer. Or the “B. D. Cooper” modification to the rear airstairs. That would show me that the developer has done his/her research.
Another thing about the 727, pilots loved it, but you could get in trouble on landing, particularly if you did not do it right, it would float forever, eating up runway. It will be a great challenge to see if you can get its flying qualities to match the real aircraft. It might give us simmers even more respect for the pilots who flew the DCA-LGA-BOS shuttle all day, every day, for example.
I will be honest, my limitation as a “developer” is simply knowledge and skill with Plane Maker and 3D programs. But we learn as we progress and push the envelope to do the best we can.
- Stekeller
SSG
You mean these vortex generators?
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3449179/Q400TailTease01.JPG
Also, each plane you make brings you one step closer to making the next plane better.
I sometimes wish i made a smaller plane first before the Q400, cause then the Q400 would not have taken as long to make and it will most likely be better all round. Hindsight is 20/20 right?
Always.
Sent from the dark side of the Moon.
Jack:
OK, you proved my point about screenshots. NOW I am excited for your 727!
A former 727 pilot also pointed out the difference in the inlet shape for the No. 2 engine from the -100 to the -200. I assume you are working on the -200 (the most popular), but his question to me was “how can you tell the difference between the -100 and -200 head on?”
And an unsolicited tip – I have flown in the cockpit of the 727-200 a few times, and the engines are virtually silent from up front! Shocking I know. On startup, you have no indication that anything is happening without looking at the engine gauges.
- Stekeller
SSG
I will have a write up on FlyJSim.com this weekend all about the 727 Series.
Thanks for the tip on the sounds. Oddly i bet if i didn’t include some kind of engine sound in the cockpit, many simmers would be angry.
There’s a little engine noise on take off, the usual ground noise, and a lot of in-flight wind/slipstream racket up front in the 72.
Now that we are using SASL, i am sure i will be doing a lot more with sounds this time around. This all depends on if we can procure the proper sounds of course.
Let that be a sign that “engine noise” in Jack n Joe’s 727 is not going to be WIND like it was in the Q.
That was the only thing which let the Q down for me. I’d rather have had a totally silent cockpit.
Engines, yes. Wind, no.
Really? in that case the wind noise is controlled in planemaker, which is very easy to turn down to your liking.
You are the first to mention your displeasure with the wind sound. I will consider changing it in later releases.
I’d love to know where in PM I can do that. Haven’t found anything in there which would be obvious.
I mentioned it months ago, and was told it was an xp9 limitation.
Just to let you know, found in Engine Specs to change Wind Noise Recorded At and changed it to 600KIAS.
It STILL cuts in at 200kts.
But this is R&D which shouldn’t be left to the end user.
And this is more or less exactly how it is in the real plane. I posted to your thread a work around that should work.
Wind noise is really the primary source of sound in the cruise on jets. I for one want it to stay for the sake of realism.
- Stekeller
SSG