Secret Project #1: This one is a classic!

[h2egc 31]

I would LOVE to see this done for XPX :)

[RickB1293 9]

I spent MANY hours on the Navy version C54. The passenger compartment had rear facing seats and we always wondered if the pilots faced the same direction. I also remember running up to military power at takeoff then shutting down and changing the plugs right there at the runway apron. Good thing you've included the maintenance stands!

[flyboycjs 1]

There already is a very realistic fokker-100/70 add-on out there by flight-one if you are interested in this plane

Im talking about the F27 bud

Hey Craig, yeah I'd love to see an F27 too, you know about the VirtualCol Fokker 50? Its a good price and a nice filler till PMDG do one :)

Thanks Dean will look into it.

[NM5K 1]

However, an older business jet ,perhaps an early Lear, would sell far more in my opinion.I would be first in the que.

Yep, I like all planes, so no problems with a DC-6. :)But a good detailed Learjet is something I drool for. Doesn't really matterwhat model.. 25,35, 31a, 45, etc, I'm really not that picky.But... Unless I have missed them on the market, there seems to be little interest in them..Maybe it's burnout from MSFS using them as a default plane through the years..I dunno.. :/I think the 31a may be one of my favorites. Not too old, but not totally glass cockpit like a 45.

[Guest BeaverDriver]

Yep, I like all planes, so no problems with a DC-6. :)But a good detailed Learjet is something I drool for. Doesn't really matterwhat model.. 25,35, 31a, 45, etc, I'm really not that picky.But... Unless I have missed them on the market, there seems to be little interest in them..Maybe it's burnout from MSFS using them as a default plane through the years..I dunno.. :/I think the 31a may be one of my favorites. Not too old, but not totally glass cockpit like a 45.

Check out the Xtreme Prototypes Lear 20 series. I've been all over North America in that and love it. Mostly 3D gauges (Google Xtreme Prototypes - I don't have the link off hand - sorry).For me it would be a Lear 35 with a medevac interior option (as well as cargo and/or vip). They are used a LOT and apparently can be fitted with long range tanks and go trans Atlantic. A really worthwhile airplane for sure!

[Jensbaltzer 2]

All I can say is GOOD NEWS I love it

[LGM118 0]

I do have a few actual questions (my antics aside) about the plans PMDG has for this project:1. Obviously my opinion is going to be shaped by what we've seen from A2A. Robert, your initial post even sort of hints that you did talk to A2A while planning this project out. My question is this: Will PMDG be trying to mimic the ideas underpinning Accu-sim, such as underlying system fidelity, or are you making a simulation that's more focused on the top-level system accuracy. In other words, is PMDG going to be going all-out in the way A2A does with their aircraft in order to replicate systems, or is this more of a straightforward sim that models performace specs?2. What sort of navigational equipment will we be expecting? Are we going to have original period equipment (VOR/ADF), somewhat modern equipment (VOR/DME, etc.), or possibly even a simple GPS (lots of these aircraft were later fitted with basic GPS' later on in their lives)?3. Rob, you mentioned that your team had been in contact with A2A as you began work on the DC-6. Is there any other coordination or cooperation going on? Should we expect A2A to at some point release an Accu-sim package for the PMDG DC-6, or some similar type of thing? In other words, is there any other discussion going on between A2A and PMDG that you think we'd find interesting?thanks

[scandinavian13 5,192]

I do have a few actual questions (my antics aside) about the plans PMDG has for this project:

Re-read the posts, and you'll see your answers.1 - It's not NGX depth, so no failures model (though his later post confirmed a consequences model, like the JS4100)2 - From the very first post, there's an option for GPS that Ryan mentioned you could swap with the RXP similar to Carenado/etcQuestion three hasn't been answered from what I've seen, though.

[LGM118 0]

Re-read the posts, and you'll see your answers.1 - It's not NGX depth, so no failures model (though his later post confirmed a consequences model, like the JS4100)2 - From the very first post, there's an option for GPS that Ryan mentioned you could swap with the RXP similar to Carenado/etcQuestion three hasn't been answered from what I've seen, though.

Kyle, I'm not asking about the failures module. Go fly the A2A Stratocruiser and you'll understand what I'm really asking about here. Really, it's fun, you'll like it. More importantly, it doesn't have a failures module. I'm asking about the level of immersion we can expect out of the PMDG DC-6, like whether we're going to have the systems work "right."And yeah, sure I could use third party software to get the "just right" configuration I'm looking for, but I want something that works right on its own. Besides, third party software is like doing a blood transfusion; it usually works, but every so often somebody rejects the blood and dies. Similarly, every so often the third party stuff doesn't take and the original thing you have dies. I'm still trying to figure out what's going on with the VC in my NGX.

[airnews 0]

Awesome DC-6 video from South Africa. Edited February 9, 2012 by airnews

[alexczarn 37]

Looks tremendous!Is there going to be a simplified systems option??

[tmegowan 1]

This will bring back some memories. My late father was a Flight Engineer on the DC-6's, 7's, Connies (still my favorite all time airplane), and the CL-44. In fact I have several of his old flight manuals for the Connies from Slick Airways. I can't wait for this one.

[Tabs 2,790]

Kyle, I'm not asking about the failures module. Go fly the A2A Stratocruiser and you'll understand what I'm really asking about here. Really, it's fun, you'll like it. More importantly, it doesn't have a failures module. I'm asking about the level of immersion we can expect out of the PMDG DC-6, like whether we're going to have the systems work "right."And yeah, sure I could use third party software to get the "just right" configuration I'm looking for, but I want something that works right on its own. Besides, third party software is like doing a blood transfusion; it usually works, but every so often somebody rejects the blood and dies. Similarly, every so often the third party stuff doesn't take and the original thing you have dies. I'm still trying to figure out what's going on with the VC in my NGX.

Have you ever known us to make aircraft systems that don't work right? Systems that work right are sort of our MO here...

[Kobradelta1000 0]

Ryan, the damage modell will be implemented as "not as real as it can be", thats how i understand it?....but doesn´t include that there is no engine overstressing or a other simpler failures at all, i hope.That would be my decision to buy it or not.....Thnx

[4116705510 4]

I think they mean that a failures model won't be installed, they're talking about programmable failures, because with 72 cylinders, eight magnetos, and so on, it would be a very complex failure modeler, especially when compared to the NGX.