And after PMDG B777 ?

[kevinh 409]

717 will not sell well because it is classic, according to somebody at PMDG. I really want them to do a 787 after the 777. Everyone who wants a 787 after the 777 reply with a +1

This isn't a campaign or an opinion poll. It's about what people would like to see next. +1 posts contribute nothing new.

Whats wrong with this http://www.abacuspub...g/s658frame.htm

It would be quicker to list what's right with it: Errm, that's it. Kevin Hall

[Flight Sim Geek 0]

It would be quicker to list what's right with it:

Totally Agree. Can't wait till T7!! Thanks, Aaron G.

[Rocky1992 0]

Yeah, we need Airbus in familiar PMDG quality. The A380 or A340 would be really nice. But Boeing 787 would be nice, too.There are too much developers for Boeing. If someone can program a good airbus then it is PMDG.

[Flight Sim Geek 0]

Yeah, we need Airbus in familiar PMDG quality.

FlightSimLabs who made Concorde X are making an Airbus A3XX Master Collection which will have all Airbus aircraft in PMDG Quality. FlightSimLabs CEO is the ex-CEO of PMDG.

[Rocky1992 0]

Oh, thank you very much. I remember the Concorde X published by Aerosoft is from this developer.I am excited to wait for the outcome of this development! Then the Boeing 787 Dreamliner would be very nice.

[Flight Sim Geek 0]

Oh, thank you very much. I remember the Concorde X published by Aerosoft is from this developer.I am excited to wait for the outcome of this development! Then the Boeing 787 Dreamliner would be very nice.

Yep, the Concorde X on Aerosoft is from FlightSimLabs. After the 777 and would love the Boeing 787 Dreamliner to. It doesn't matter what the develop next, they can count me as a costumer. Have you used Concorde X. If you haven't do give it a try as it is great.

[Airbus Commander 563]

I never knew Leftaris was the Ex-CEO of PMDG??? I was always under the impression that RSR founded and led PMDG from the get go....

[Flight Sim Geek 0]

I never knew Leftaris was the Ex-CEO of PMDG??? I was always under the impression that RSR founded and led PMDG from the get go....

I am not quite sure, but he had something high up to do with PMDG. He left/step down to create Flight Sim Labs to make Concorde X and a PMDG quality Airbus series. PMDG and Flight Sim Labs are friendly with each other (I think)

[Airbus Commander 563]

Yeh, well I knew he was an ex-PMDG developer, Just never heard the CEO rumours, I think that post is wrong though AFAIK.

[Flight Sim Geek 0]

Yeh, well I knew he was an ex-PMDG developer, Just never heard the CEO rumours, I think that post is wrong though AFAIK.

All I know is that he was high up in PMDG.

[Kwakadilly 15]

Europeans .. real Americans love their Boeing

Really? I take offense to that. Here you sit and call me a "fake American" since I like Airbus more than Boeing, yet I serve in this countries military. Who is the "real" American here?

Americans dislike Airbus because we have our own company called BOEING and they make aircraft that are just as good, safer and they aren't subsidized by the government.

Mind explaining how a Boeing is safer than an Airbus? The point of Airbus and FBW is to be the safest. I'm not trying to get in on the Airbus vs. Boeing debate, they are metal tubes with wings. I love Airbus, especially the A32X series. I also love Boeing's 757, and 777, not to mention the 787 looks amazing! To sit here and bash one company with out facts is childish.

[scura 0]

---snip--- I love Airbus, especially the A32X series. I also love Boeing's 757, and 777, not to mention the 787 looks amazing! To sit here and bash one company with out facts is childish.

And even worth: Nobody of us will ever get a penny from Airbus nor Boeing for taking position for them!

[Airbus Commander 563]

If that's not beautiful, then I don't know what is....

[isaiah 1]

If I heard RSR correctly he mentioned that the platform for the NGX, as is now, can be used for further projects. Which would imply boeing aircraft.He also mentioned they're working on a way to let the FS community experience airline operations. He didn't elaborate on it. Details on that would be revealed on a later date. What it exactly means is speculating of my part and I don't really want to do that. Source: http://www.fsbreak.net/podcast/96

[4116705510 4]

Really? I take offense to that. Here you sit and call me a "fake American" since I like Airbus more than Boeing, yet I serve in this countries military. Who is the "real" American here? Mind explaining how a Boeing is safer than an Airbus? The point of Airbus and FBW is to be the safest. I'm not trying to get in on the Airbus vs. Boeing debate, they are metal tubes with wings. I love Airbus, especially the A32X series. I also love Boeing's 757, and 777, not to mention the 787 looks amazing! To sit here and bash one company with out facts is childish.

Yes, FBW is designed to make you safer, but its main idea is to make an aircraft more effeceitn. How? Well with FBW, a computer is constanlty trimming the aircraft, keeping it stable for the pilot. With the airliner, they can make teh aircraft less stable, because the computer can maintain stability at all times. By making it less stable, you can improve aerodynamics, and do more with teh airframe, because measures to maintain stability in a manually controlled aircraft are built into the plane, however it loses aerodyamics so that it can be stable. Jet fighters that use FBW, F-35, F-22, Rafaele, cannot be flown if all computers shut down, it is too unstable to possibly control, so teh pilot would eject. The airliner can be flown if all computers are lost (rudder and elevator trim are non-computer), but they aren't made as unstable as fighters, since 100-400 people can't eject (it would be cool though!). For Airbus, I think they're designes aren't as safe as Boeing, because Boeing allows the pilot to override the computer whenever he chooses, in the Airbus, it maintains measure to 'save' the aircraft until there is a dire emergency; that cannot be overridden at any time. For US Airways flight 1549, I beleive the Airbus logic contributed to the loss of the plane, because during the birdstrike, I believe that the measures programmed to save the plane and components shut off both engines, in case of damage, preventing restart. Now, if you see a video of a plane gulping up a bird/birds, it has flame-outs, its spitting out junk in a fireball, and many times the engine continues operating. Now, the chances that both engines recieved enough birds each to render them both completely inoperable are slim; my hypothesis is that the computers, in measures to save the engines, shut them off permanently, so restart could happen. Airbus and investigators would never admit this if true, because it would cause panic, thats my hypothesis. I also don't like how Airbus put a pitot-tube on the A330 that wasn't sufficient to deice the pitots at temperatures that occaisonally are reached. But that acciden twas pilot error. I don't see how you could favor the European-French plane if you're American, especially if you're a servicmember. Boeign has made the best jet airliners since the 1950's, with the 707 onwards. Even acclaimed Douglas lost that with the DC-10, their only bad design. You're like a guy born in Los Angeles, with Californian parents and family that roots for the Celtics instead of the Lakers. You've got a champion team at home, why go to the enemy of your home-team.