Thanks for that info. Good to know.

 

Lee

Disappointing no Global Express from you guys.... oh well. And Gulfstream is because the company refuses? Too bad.

Fifth, we are required to pay Licensing Fees to Cessna for each of their aircraft we produce.

 

Hello Ron

We have enough Cessna's by now, A new Hawker/Beechcraft would be well received.

One like this please.

 

http://xpr.hawkerbeechcraft.com/

Third, a Full Featured and Complex Corporate offering can, and yes it has, taken up to and over three years to develop for only one FS Version and another twelve months or so for another FS Version.

Fourth, competitors often "duplicate" an original Corporate Jet resulting in "diluted market" and confused public in much the same way as the Commercial 737 market.

 

This is something that has bothered me for years. Imagine that over a period of 3-4yrs of development two or three companies will announce the SAME aircraft. In the period of time it takes to make it, so many diverse aircrafts could have been made and at times it seems to be such as waste of time. This is seen when developers release their products and soon after the customers will ask..."So when will you make a ........" or "You should have made ........" I think at the moment two or three companies are making an Airbus...

I think at the moment two or three companies are making an Airbus...

 

Yup, but only one of them is doing it properly, two if you include EADS.

 

Al

There are LOTS of short - med range Cessnas, Lears etc to choose from. But they all are only 2-3000+ range.

 

The very obvious missing gap is the ultra long range corporate jet, i.e. G-V or GX or Falcon 7x, e,g, capable of true intercontinental range of around 6,000nm.. A high end freeware Falcon 7x or even a 900LX would fill the bill.

 

Others including me have adapted the now ancient Lavigne, et. al., FS2000 Falcon 50 for FSX and P.A.D. relased a freeware 7x more recently and no one seems to have been hauled into legal proceedings in France . .

To this day I am shocked that nobody has done any of the Challenger variants (601, 604, 605). Essentially all they are is a shortened fuselage version of the older CRJ variants (e.g. CRJ 200).

 

Hugely popular biz jet, and I would love to have one in FS.

To this day I am shocked that nobody has done any of the Challenger variants (601, 604, 605). Essentially all they are is a shortened fuselage version of the older CRJ variants (e.g. CRJ 200).

 

Hugely popular biz jet, and I would love to have one in FS.

 

Yes I think a challenger would be nice.

 

Also keep in mind a lot of the new long range jets have very very cool cockpits. For example the EASy cockpit. But that is something that is hard to do in fs. Id settle for a Lear 45XR or 60XR.

 

Lee

First, Gulfstream is out of the question for us and we suspect others will experience similar responses.

Thanks for responding to this Ron. It's a REAL shame they have this attitude towards the community, especially towards professional development houses like yours, let alone more amatuer efforts. IMHO it's a total crock of baloney that a poor model would harm their brand or sales, absolute rubbish.

 

Is also a shame that people seem almost afraid to discuss the "Gulftsream issue" in public, as has been mentioned by others I'd pay a healthy premium to get a GIV, but I guess that's not gonna happen.

 

I wonder if there'd be a market for a payware VC quality?

I would love to see a fully functional pmdg detail level Challenger 605! That would be beyond awesome! I would pay to see it get developed it haha. :lol: A gulfstream G550 would be really awesome too but I don't see that happening in the near and far future... :unsure:

If there was a very high quality CRJ200 i would use that as a biz jet too. Lots of those have been converted.

 

O well

 

Lee

Is anyone aware of the Bombardier Challenger 300 we have in our library? Here's the link: http://library.avsim...ger&CatID=fsxac

 

This aircraft features a full 2D panel, Virtual Cockpit, a decent exterior model, and flight dynamics that feel okay, a little too much like the default Learjet's, though it's operating limits are on par with the real-world counter-part. It uses the freeware FMC by Garret Smith, complete with an LNAV and VNAV button on the MCU, a semi-functional hydraulics, electric, and air simulation, along with some other goodies, such as a virtual cabin. The sound is, unfortunately aliased to the default CRJ-700's, but oh well. It's still a great model, especially for freeware.

Thanks for responding to this Ron. It's a REAL shame they have this attitude towards the community, especially towards professional development houses like yours, let alone more amatuer efforts. IMHO it's a total crock of baloney that a poor model would harm their brand or sales, absolute rubbish.

 

Is also a shame that people seem almost afraid to discuss the "Gulftsream issue" in public, as has been mentioned by others I'd pay a healthy premium to get a GIV, but I guess that's not gonna happen.

 

I wonder if there'd be a market for a payware VC quality?

 

There are some nice models on this page. we could all chip in, have someone do the avionics, someone do the animations, and someone do the FSX materials, export exterior and interior MDLs and viola!! We'll call it the AVSIMBIZJET or something, LOL.

 

http://www.turbosquid.com/Search/Index.cfm?keyword=gulfstream&x=12&y=8

I think for some reason, a lot of sim pilots tend to gravitate initially toward the biggest, most technologically advanced aircraft first (that being the likes of 747, 777, etc. since AFAIK there is no high-end payware A380 currently). This is kind of natural I guess, since these aircraft seem to have the most "toys and gadgets". At least when I first got into simming back in 1998, that was my thoughts then. Naturally, big international airports go with those aircraft so that's how we end up with several iterations of the big Boeing aircraft and several of the same airports over and over again. On the other hand, as you get older or if you fly in the real world, you will be much more likely to have more interest in smaller aircraft that are closer to what you or a friend flies, or your style changes over time.

 

Another thing that hampers interest in corporate aircraft I think is that folks don't see them all that often when they go to the airport to fly. Lots of people have flown on a 737 or the like. Very few of us here have flown on a LJ45 (my aircraft of choice). In fact, I'd tell you that looking at the default LJ45 aircraft in FS leave a little bit to be desired until you see one in person. Actually I've learned that there's not too many aircraft that once I've seen them in person, that I dont like in some way or another and it really makes an impression on me. I think that if folks could experience business jets up close and personal, even if just by visiting one on a ramp one day at your local airport, the desire/demand for them would go up. A great example of this is the Cessna Caravan. Until I got to see one in person, I was not a fan of them. In the sim they look small and uninteresting. When you see one in person on a ramp, you realize just how big they are and they hold more interest for myself then.

 

Finally, one last thought is that many times folks look at what the default aircraft has in the way of tech/features and tend to forget that many things get left out and it's not until they investigate deeper that they realize that a particular aircraft, when modeled correctly (and in my case, this is with hardware and 3rd part avionics we developed) there is a lot of neat things about that particular aircraft. Believe it or not, every one of my customers use the default LJ45 from FS9/FSX (with a few suggested tweaks) but the combination of hardware/software that we've created for it brings the project alive and I can tell you with all honesty that an hour long flight in the LJ45 sim we have keeps us busy the entire time while operating using real procedures/handbooks, etc.

 

Hopefully there will be an increase in interest for corporate aviation. I believe that slowly there will be, as long as the likes of Orbx continue to develop small airfields that cater to the GA scene. Which by the way, I love having hundreds more airports and interesting locations to fly into with a corporate jet than being forced to fly into the larger fields required by airliners. It's refreshing B)

i would love to see the global express in fsx .