Quote from Robert to me from my first locked thread"JB"Seems like you have quite a bit of pent up frustration.I mentioned in two updates that I remember that the failures module was falling behind, and would likely not make the release. I then mentioned in a single update post that it was being taken out of the project, and we would look at adding it in a future update.I'm sorry if you didn't get the opportunity to read those posts (I frequently delete my own update post threads because they tend to become filled will lots of junk that causes them to bounce up and down the thread line...) but this does not change the facts that we elected not to hold the release for this one item. It has been our experience that the VAST majority of our customers are not interested in simulating failures- and we always need to keep the core client in mind when making decisions on whether to hold or release.(FWIW: The first indication that failures might not make the release came in July... So it was some time ago...)If you are of the opinion that this is not a study simulation, then... well- you are entitled to your opinion. In my opinion, it is. (Please keep in mind that I only have a few thousand hours in the airplane, so that makes me largely unqualified to answer such a question. :-p)I am going to lock this thread because your approach to addressing the issue has upset a number of folks and I've had to delete a number of posts from folks who have taken offense at the entire tone of the thread.We appreciate your disappointment, but there is no point creating acrimony in the forum.Robert S. Randazzo Precision Manuals Development Grouphttp://www.precisionmanuals.comWow, my first locked thread ever... Sorry to stir so much BS up and wake everyone outa bed this late, but I felt the thread might be somewhat therapuetic and help me get rid of my, "Pent Up Frustration" of feeling like I was given the runaround about not being answered pre-J41 release, regarding the anticipated failure module. So I guess the official word is that you all did mention that the failure mod was cancelled prior to release? I'm sorry I missed that thread, or post. But I did ask numerous times about the status of it durring the development and even the release day and never got a reply. I guess some of the devs never saw the thread or posts, because if they had, I'm sure they woulda replied...I had no intention of a harsh or bad tone to the thread, I swear I wasn't bitter when I wrote it :) And I'm sorry to those that were so upset by the thread.So Robert, is there a possibility that in the future, near or far, that we may see more development towards the failure mod for the J41? I'm only asking because above in your quote, you mention that your last singular post stated that you guys might consider it. "I mentioned in two updates that I remember that the failures module was falling behind, and would likely not make the release. I then mentioned in a single update post that it was being taken out of the project, and we would look at adding it in a future update." Sorry to wake ya.Jeff Barco (JB)

Jeff,Yeah, I didn't see those other posts Robert had made - sorry for the confusion. I've already been reamed for it on the PMDG email list ;)I'm not a "developer" in the programming sense btw, please don't take my posts to be coming from someone who's actually involved in the coding aspect of what we do - I have the Dev Team banner, but I do customer support and other odd-jobs around here.We never say never on stuff here, but it's very unlikely we're going to do a full failure simulation for the J41. It's something literally only a handful of people ever use as Robert said - I know you're one of those handful, but we just didn't feel this product warranted it, especially at the price point we're selling it at.

Hi,I'm not disappointed with the J41 as it stands, but I was one of those who was asking after the failure modeling, and didn't get any responses either. I had read Roberts post saying that it was sliding and wouldn't make the initial release, but nothing more was said.An unambiguous, clear response at the time about whether or not it was going to be included *at any time*, would have been good.It appears it has now gone from "not to hold up the release" to "we're not producing it". Would have been nice to know before purchase.Best regards,Robin.

The reason I was so looking forward to the J41 failure module was because I would actually use it. The flights are short enough that I actually dont use time acceleration and sit at my computer for the whole flight, unlike a 10 hour (or more) MD11 or 747 flight. The other thing I was hoping for in the new failure module was maybe being able to set the time greater than 10 hours. By setting it at maybe 1 failure per 50 or 100 hours, then you still have cause to do every checklist item by the book. I'm sorry to admit that at this point in the J41 I dont even look at the checklists because I know that as long as I start the engines properly, everything will continue to work.Im still very happy with the J41, and have flown nothing else since it was released. I just thought I would throw that point out there as to why I dont use failures on the MD11 or 747 but was really looking forward to failures on the J41.

Jeff,We never say never on stuff here, but it's very unlikely we're going to do a full failure simulation for the J41. It's something literally only a handful of people ever use as Robert said - I know you're one of those handful, but we just didn't feel this product warranted it, especially at the price point we're selling it at.

Thanks for the Reply Tabs.... I appreciate it, but with all due respect, I was hoping Robert (RSR) would reply. After all, the question was addressed to him. I think his words saying a yay or nay is all thats needed here. I will ask again... So Robert, is there a possibility that in the future, near or far, that we may see development towards the failure mod for the J41? I'm only asking because above in your quote, you mention that your last singular post stated that you guys might consider it. ThanksJeff Barco (JB)

Jess-I've mentioned in a few places that it is something we MIGHT back-work into the J-41. From this vantage point it is hard to tell.It will be end-of-year before I think failures will be in a position to be evaluated... If it can be done without a significant workflow interruption on the NG- then it is likely we'll add in as an update.I won't even guess on the percentage of likelihood at this point... (too many variables... literally and figuratively. :( )

If it can be done without a significant workflow interruption on the NG- then it is likely we'll add in as an update.

Good to know PMDG machinery is working on the NG. :( All of us miss some update.

Jess-I've mentioned in a few places that it is something we MIGHT back-work into the J-41. From this vantage point it is hard to tell.It will be end-of-year before I think failures will be in a position to be evaluated... If it can be done without a significant workflow interruption on the NG- then it is likely we'll add in as an update.I won't even guess on the percentage of likelihood at this point... (too many variables... literally and figuratively. :( )

Thank you very much Robert for that straight foreward answer. I appreciate it. Jeff Barco (JB)