Is Prepar3d even being used by the government?Secondly, the government can do a lot of things. They could come shut your private business down in various ways if they really wanted to.What exactly is your evidence that such a scenario is likely or realistic though? For what reason would the government try to stop LM's primary market with Prepar3d, which appears to be civilian at this point?If they don't mind DCS selling A-10 simulators or BI selling Arma II even though it uses VBS2's engine then why exactly would they shut down a civilian simulator? There are several companies selling games built on the basis of engines they also use as defense contractors. None of them are getting shut down or even seem to be worried about such happening.You seem to be crying wolf. What's the real danger here?

Evidence? Things like that tend to be eyes only when dealing with defense contractors, DLA and the logic of those wise ones who roam the hallowed halls of the "E Ring"... as I said before, they have done it before and yes they will do it again, without comment to anyone. Especially a bunch of civilian flight sim hobbits...Crying wolf?I seem to recall that I was painted in the same light for trying to point out all the evidence that FLIGHT was going to be exactly what it turned out to be...Indeed time will tell...

They would care when Microsoft sue them for breach of contract

You do realize that under federal law, MS would have to get permission to sue them from the US government before they could even begin bringing any cause of action...And as strange as that sounds this all falls under the federal protection called sovereign immunity.Under this immunity, the U.S. (including the federal government, all military branches and any of its direct supporters or defense contractors) cannot be sued in court unless it agrees to the lawsuit or voluntarily waives immunity.So basically you can;t sue them, unless they say its okay for you to sue them...Our .gov is amazingly crafty at protecting its own interests, which include defense contractors...

That's Lockeed-Martin's worry, not your's. I'm fairly confident that L-M's legal department can beat up MS's lawyers... :(

When you consider that in matters of any defense contract LM will also be backed by the US Department of Justice and its 14,000 lawyers protecting any real or perceived US national interest in the case, yeah...MS would have a hard time pulling it off...

Edited January 7, 201214 yr by Jacoba

That's Lockeed-Martin's worry, not your's. ...

While that might be true, wouldnt you, as an addon developer, be worried about investing money into a platform which might get closed for your customers? Especially after a while, when Prepar3d have been developed so far that its not trivial to port a Prepar3d addon to FSX

While that might be true, wouldnt you, as an addon developer, be worried about investing money into a platform which might get closed for your customers? Especially after a while, when Prepar3d have been developed so far that its not trivial to port a Prepar3d addon to FSX

Not in the least! Since everything I build for FSX will port into P3D with very little effort, what's the risk? My primary market remains with FSX. Anything sold for the P3D platform can only add to the bottom line.As an added bonus from my point of view, P3D is less tolerant of "sloppy code," meaning that it enforces the rules more strictly. Hence anything that runs well in P3D makes for a better, more stable FSX product. It's a win-win!

That's Lockeed-Martin's worry, not your's. I'm fairly confident that L-M's legal department can beat up MS's lawyers... :(

:(

They would care when Microsoft sue them for breach of contract

Why does everyone care? LM is backed by the US government for USAF aircraft and technologies.

Why does everyone care? LM is backed by the US government for USAF aircraft and technologies.

I'm fairly certain that there are some major sub-systems that are not available to anyone but agencies of the DoD.

They would care when Microsoft sue them for breach of contract

It pains me to read crap like this because you have no idea what you are talking about and it may end up running off LM the same way ACES was run off.LM posts on these forums. They have armies of lawyers and have given anyone and everyone the ok to buy from them.

Evidence? Things like that tend to be eyes only when dealing with defense contractors, DLA and the logic of those wise ones who roam the hallowed halls of the "E Ring"... as I said before, they have done it before and yes they will do it again, without comment to anyone. Especially a bunch of civilian flight sim hobbits...Crying wolf?I seem to recall that I was painted in the same light for trying to point out all the evidence that FLIGHT was going to be exactly what it turned out to be...Indeed time will tell...

Again, there are numerous examples of defense contractors selling their software engines for public consumption and none of them are getting shut down. These are all still private companies.You can continue to speak in big words and act like you are an insider. It doesn't change the fact that your assertions that Prepar3d could get shut down at anytime may be technically true, as in the government could do that like they can do an endless number of things, but there's no logical reason to think they would.Hell, BF3's engine is being used by the Army right now. You think BF3 will be shut down soon?

While that might be true, wouldnt you, as an addon developer, be worried about investing money into a platform which might get closed for your customers? Especially after a while, when Prepar3d have been developed so far that its not trivial to port a Prepar3d addon to FSX

Orbx is a pretty smart and successful company. They are in close contact with the Prepar3d project and seem to have no worries. So why should you?No one is forcing you to see it as a viable platform. Keep using FSX.

Edited January 7, 201214 yr by bonchie

I don't think we have to worry much about the government stepping in to tell LM to shut P3D down that's a s-t-r-e-c-h. However, LM could certainly restrict the use as it sees fit; whenever it sees fit.

Orbx is a pretty smart and successful company. They are in close contact with the Prepar3d project and seem to have no worries. So why should you?

You don't think John V wouldn't like to be in line to provide the scenery solution for LM showcase simulation/training platform of the future do you? Especially since the consumer market that once supported his company now has such bright and stable future. Ughh wake up :(

You don't think John V wouldn't like to be in line to provide the scenery solution for LM showcase simulation/training platform of the future do you? Especially since the consumer market that once supported his company now has such bright and stable future. Ughh wake up

Thanks Blaze, your comments are spot on and rational. Food for thought.

I don't think we have to worry much about the government stepping in to tell LM to shut P3D down that's a s-t-r-e-c-h. However, LM could certainly restrict the use as it sees fit; whenever it sees fit.You don't think John V wouldn't like to be in line to provide the scenery solution for LM showcase simulation/training platform of the future do you? Especially since the consumer market that once supported his company now has such bright and stable future. Ughh wake up :(

Yes, I'm sure LM is dying to pay Orbx big bucks for accurate house placement and walking people in Australia for just a training platform, if that's truly who'll they'll limit sales to.And I'm the one that needs to wake up? The consumer market is as stable as it was a week ago for Orbx. It's probably even more so now that they don't have to develop for a new simulator or worry about it taking their player base.You guys can be all doom and gloom if you'd like. There's no reason to be except simplistic idle speculation that's actually mostly been countered by LM themselves, but hey, whatever you guys want.

Thanks Blaze, your comments are spot on and rational. Food for thought.

The XP10 forum is a ways down.We get your motivations here. Let it go.

Edited January 7, 201214 yr by bonchie

Thanks Blaze, your comments are spot on and rational. Food for thought.

21 consecutive years of service working in procurement of non-standard equipment through acquisition, contracting etc has taught me a little about things like this. I really never thought that LM was the future of the consumer based flight simulation enthusiast crowd. They are a corporate giant and we are no more their target market than it appears we are to MS now. I really think or predict that we will see support for FSX over the next few years then a continuous migration over to XP as it comes into its own by both users and developers alike.

You guys can be all doom and gloom if you'd like. There's no reason to be except simplistic idle speculation that's actually mostly been countered by LM themselves, but hey, whatever you guys want.

I think Blaze has a whole lot more credibility than you do, bonchie. He at least has credentials, you don't! He's offering fair warning of what might happen. People didn't listen when warnings of Flight's impending doom, because guys like you kept pulling wool over their eyes.

I think Blaze has a whole lot more credibility than you do, bonchie. He at least has credentials, you don't! He's offering fair warning of what might happen. People didn't listen when warnings of Flight's impending doom, because guys like you kept pulling wool over their eyes.

Unless he works for LM, his credentials are useless and irrelevant. And aside from beating your chest, there's no similarities between Flight's situation and what this one may or may not become. It's not a coincidence that the same four or five people are running around to every thread that mentions P3D and insisting it's not going anywhere and to look elsewhere. Everyone has their reasons. Your's just happens to be obvious.

To be very clear to all and hopefully from the source (me): Lockheed Martin secured the source code for Microsoft ESP v1.0. ESP is NOT the same as FSX although based on the same source code itself as FSX.

Thanks John. Sorry I didn't get to this earlier.In the interest of full disclosure and considering that I am retiring at the end of the month, I can reveal some stuff that John wouldn't probably reveal here.First, in the interest of establishing my credentials, let me say that I am, until the end of the month, the Director of Strategic Development for Northrop Grumman's Sperry operation - specifically, Strategic Development for the International Defense segment of Sperry with particular emphasis on Navigation systems. That has been kind of an open secret in the flight sim industry, so that revelation won't come as a surprise to many, I am sure.Lockheed is not the only one of the big five that signed up for ESP. So did Northrop. Why? Simple... Simulation of the battle scape, whether it be air, land or sea, is one of the fastest growing segments of defense budgets, not only in the U.S, but internationally as well. With diminishing defense budgets, if you can simulate it, that's less expensive in more ways than one, when compared to sending human assets in to understand and communicate the environment. No matter the subject, if there is the possibility of being able to simulate it, governments are looking to do so.Think about it, if you haven't already... It is far more efficient and safer, to model the landing beach with previously mapped, and fully accurate bathymetry data, as an example, than it is to send in multiple teams to perform that survey, and translate the risks into a brief prior to sending the team in. Another example; it is far easier to model the possible scenarios, and risks, of deploying subsurface assets in the Arabian Gulf than actually studying those scenarios prior to actually putting those assets there. There are thousands of examples of why an ESP product finds companies like LMOC and NGC as adopters.As I have read through the many postings and speculation regarding LMOC's intentions, and their license, I had to laugh at a few. I did say earlier that LMOC, Raytheon, NGC, Boeing, L3, etc., have more lawyers than Business Development folks. I was not exaggerating. I can't speak for John's team of course, but I would be willing to bet that their contract with Microsoft was gone through with a fine tooth comb over weeks, if not months, before LMOC executed it.Relax folks... Lockheed has their ducks lined up and there is no grand conspiracy... Having this fantastic community of simulation expertise at AVSIM is something that you should be proud of. You should also be particularly proud that the guys of LMOC recognize it.