Josh Howard has already stated in the Avsim interview that they don't expect to do the whole world, airliners, long haul, ATC among other things

 

right, already forgot about that. but what I do not understand at all is why they don't open flight for 3rd party developers covering exactly those areas where MS is not willing to engage in anyway? why not let flight1 work on ultimate traffic for flight? REX or Hifisim on weather engines? Aerosoft, Captainsim, PMDG et al on airliners? they could easily please many more people when they released an SDK for those topics when they don't plan to make money on them anyway. I mean, they could even lower their 'handling charge' way down from 30% to say 10 or even 5% since that is possibly what 3rd party developers could be willing to pay as share to MS and MS still makes money with something they would not do money with themselves. Better get 10% than 0% if not done at all. I just don't get this.

right, already forgot about that. but what I do not understand at all is why they don't open flight for 3rd party developers covering exactly those areas where MS is not willing to engage in anyway? why not let flight1 work on ultimate traffic for flight? REX or Hifisim on weather engines? Aerosoft, Captainsim, PMDG et al on airliners? they could easily please many more people when they released an SDK for those topics when they don't plan to make money on them anyway. I mean, they could even lower their 'handling charge' way down from 30% to say 10 or even 5% since that is possibly what 3rd party developers could be willing to pay as share to MS and MS still makes money with something they would not do money with themselves. Better get 10% than 0% if not done at all. I just don't get this.

 

They don’t have the sub systems in yet. The core code does not support the rest of the stuff. Just note the current condition of pressure and fuel mixture. They need to get the subsystems in before they can have 3PDs develop using them.

REX or Hifisim on weather engines?

 

REX was asked about that several weeks ago, and interestingly their only comment, was they could not comment on anything regarding Flight.

Certainly raised my eyebrow.

We may not know everything going on behind the scenes, ya never know.

:Praying:

right, already forgot about that. but what I do not understand at all is why they don't open flight for 3rd party developers covering exactly those areas where MS is not willing to engage in anyway? why not let flight1 work on ultimate traffic for flight? REX or Hifisim on weather engines? Aerosoft, Captainsim, PMDG et al on airliners? they could easily please many more people when they released an SDK for those topics when they don't plan to make money on them anyway. I mean, they could even lower their 'handling charge' way down from 30% to say 10 or even 5% since that is possibly what 3rd party developers could be willing to pay as share to MS and MS still makes money with something they would not do money with themselves. Better get 10% than 0% if not done at all. I just don't get this.

 

Really big traffic addons and airliners are pretty useless as long as Flight covers only Hawaii and Alaska. It would require at least continental US modeled to have people actually interested in using them, and still it would miss loads of users from Europe and other continents. And making whole big continents and all that its not quick thing to do if they are planning to have some major increase from quality that was seen in FSX. Nobody knows if Flight engine is even designed to handle that kind of stuff.

Really big traffic addons and airliners are pretty useless as long as Flight covers only Hawaii and Alaska

no need for 'really big'. Some traffic at Hilo would be great and I would love to fly short hops in a 737 from Hilo to Honolulu, do not have much more time anyway usually for long haul flights.

Hawaiian operated some 40 DC-9s on short-haul over the years, so where this can't have liners 'coz it's only Hawaii bit comes from is a mystery to me. Convair CV-340/440s and DC-3s are liners as well. Aloha had 737-200s for intra-island, as well as F-27 Friendships. Any (preferably all) of those twin props would be cool.

 

Hawaiian serves or served Hilo, Honolulu, Kahului, Kona, Lihue, Hana, Waimea, Kapulua, Molokai, which is every major airport.

I've gone back and forth between Honolulu and Hilo or Kona by 737 a couple of times. Short hops, as you say, but certainly doable.

 

But it's not the lack of land-mass that's the real problem... it's the lack of supporting infrastructure, primarily ATC.

Couldn't agree more Ray. I guess my main point is that just because Hawaii is a small area, the argument that you can't have any of these things simply doesn't wash. What it comes down to is whether there is the will with the developers to do that. As I've said before, I'd rather they did that (add all the support functions) than have 20 million square miles and nothing cruising over 200kts, all in effectively Class G airspace. Some disagree, which is fine.

 

Do I think it will got that way? It's going to have to eventually if the intention is to keep the thing rolling on. There is only so much GA out there, and a couple of dozen GA types is (like two cockpitless warbirds, let alone four) is going to start feeling a bit samey.

 

Mike