More Non-normals to be added?

[JET 1 0]

Hi BryanI wonder if you have any plans to add more non-normal functionality in addition to the shattered windshield checklist?The LDS 767 has the possibility to set very good failure scenarios and FS2crew has the potential to make them all more realistic.Situations I'd especially like to see are the ones where things are busy, like an engine failure/fire after V1 or basically anything requiring immediate FO action during the takeoff / landing phase. Also I believe rejected takeoffs are not modelled at all for the moment.If you decide to make it big, you could create the non-normals as a separate add-on pack for those who want to buy them!What do you think?

[byork 2,259]

Hello Kyle,It's something I thought of before, as it is a good idea. Perhaps after I get the FSX ATR, MD-11 and King Air and Wilco 340 out, I can fit it in in a lull moment.There just isn't enough time in the day I'm afraid :-)Bryan

[JET 1 0]

HiYes, I understand the hurry these days :-)

[jgoggi 65]

>It's something I thought of before, as it is a good idea. >Perhaps after I get the FSX ATR, MD-11 and King Air and Wilco>340 out, I can fit it in in a lull moment.>>There just isn't enough time in the day I'm afraid :-)>>BryanHi Bryan,I know it is a commercial policy, but in my opinion is not so fair to announce, during and soon after the development of the product (it is also written in the manual), that it will updated with failures, and at the end to leave them out. I feel they will never be fitted, since now attention is drawn on FSX aircraft and the FS9 ones are more and more abandoned, although the FS9 767 is much more "important" than a King Air...It is like those aircraft that give illusion of being continuously improved because they have some inoperative buttons "reserved for future upgrades" but that die there without any future upgrade.Just my opinion.Regards,James

[byork 2,259]

Hi James,With all due respect, I disagree with the notion that the FS9 767 version was released and then left out to pasture to die.In fact, I have released three updates since the initial release (the last one being Feb of last year). Included in the free updates was some new stuff and changes, including the St. Elmos's Fire Effect, which is something never before seen in FS.However, I take your comments seriously, so I searched the forum and the manuals (including the update manual) to see if I ever explicitly stated that I 'will' be adding more non-normals. I could not find any such references.Looking back in the forum, I stated that failures are something 'we're looking' at or that 'perhaps' they can be added. But I can't find any absolute references including the phrase 'will'.If I did use the term 'will' somewhere, and I don't think I did, then that would have been an oversight on my part, and not an intentional intent to obfuscate my plans for the 767.I appreciate your enthusiasm for FS2Crew 767. However, as I've said before, I would love to add more features to the simulator post-release. But the critical issue is time, very limited resources and competing demands. That and the fact that serious failure simulations (done properly, not just haphazardly) appeal to a very tiny percentage of the overall user base.Cheers,Bryan