Possible next plane?

[kentoo 0]

Looking at the image quality of the picture of the rumored C46 I question that it is an image put there by Microsoft.

[Air1 136]

This is a C-46 that was at Airventure 2012. You don't see them very often. We can hope, but don't count on it.

 

This is TINKER BELL, you will notice the same coloration as the snap shot.

[FrankFasi 0]

Is that RA "Bob" Hoover's Shrike in the foreground, or has he finally retired from flying?

[Air1 136]

I think he has retired from flying airshow routines. I know the FAA pulled his medical a while back (one of the all time best pilots in the world) and he had to fight to get it back. I have seen him fly his amazing routines in the F-86, the P-51 and finally in the Shrike Commander. He is just a master with the "energy managment" of an aircraft, no matter the type.

[Gibbage 199]

C-46 is new news for me. If thats the case, then its another crappy cockpitless warbird. If the aircraft that were under development over 2 years ago were put on sale, im sure it would of turned Flight around for the better. I wonder what happened to all that work, and why they would just toss it to the side.

[RamonB 449]

C-46 is new news for me. If thats the case, then its another crappy cockpitless warbird.

 

Oh boy, Kevin. I surely hope it has a cockpit, because if not, it would be the last nail on Microsoft Flight's coffin.

 

If the aircraft that were under development over 2 years ago were put on sale, im sure it would of turned Flight around for the better. I wonder what happened to all that work, and why they would just toss it to the side.

Putting all that work aside would mean they just don’t care......At all.

[HiFlyer 9,343]

The thing is..........

 

I hated the cockpitless planes and still do, but there were statements that they sold well, and they still predominate in multi-player. From the standpoint of a company whose only concern is making money, they might indeed have been a "good" investment. (who the heck knows?)

 

So even though I personally disliked those planes, I find myself shying away from the (maybe) a bit arrogant assumption that just because I don't like something, its ipso-facto worthless.

 

We don't really hold ownership of the only true expression of this genre, do we? After all, we had all too many people coming onto these forums to tell us that because Flight did not fit their definitions of a Sim, it was crap; and I know what we thought of that!

 

Bleah. I don't know what to think.

[dburne 2]

We don't really hold ownership of the only true expression of this genre, do we? After all, we had all too many people coming onto these forums to tell us that because Flight did not fit their definitions of a Sim, it was crap; and I know what we thought of that!

 

I think that is a problem at this time with a civilian flight sim. With all the depth and detail of MSFS, up and especially through FSX and the third party development for it, it has become more and more of a niche market, with a shrinking customer base. While FSX by all reports seems to have sold very well, there were so many that gave it a try, and put it away on a shelf somewhere.

I think MS recognized this, and saw the need to develop something that might bring a lot of new blood into flight simming.

 

I keep seeing people coming here and saying, this is why Flight failed.

In actuality, no one here knows that. I know the Flight Team, does not even know why. For all we know, it may have just been a program that got caught up in several cuts, as it was so new, due to the sluggish economy and poor overall sales figures for MS as a whole.

 

For the benefit of the future of civilian flight simming on the PC , I think someone is going to have to step up to the plate and deliver, both a really nice modern sim, and a way to bring new blood into the hobby. And that will be quite the balancing act indeed. Without the influx of new folks, eventually the market will continue to shrink and wither away.

[quadraspleen 7]

if it is a C-46, and that pic is definitely a C-46, and if it has a 'pit, (and Kevin thinks it won't ) then I'll be buying it (as long as it isn't expensive - why sink lots of money into this franchise now MS have pulled it?)

 

here's to being positive and hoping...

[watermouse 0]

What is this I heard about "Project: Columbia" about MSFLIGHT?

Was that the new scenery pack they were working on?

Meh....Anyways, I seen M.Kok post about it on Aerosoft forums

[RoboRay 126]

What is this I heard about "Project: Columbia" about MSFLIGHT?

 

I dunno... What is it that you heard?

[watermouse 0]

I dunno... What is it that you heard?

 

Not much really.....

Only this: http://www.gameplanet.co.nz/news/1006601.20120726.Microsoft-cancels-Flight-and-Project-Columbia/

 

Ahhh, it is a Kinect thing. Not sure what, but nothing to do with flight...

 

my bad.

[razorhog703 15]

I hated the cockpitless planes and still do, but there were statements that they sold well, and they still predominate in multi-player. From the standpoint of a company whose only concern is making money, they might indeed have been a "good" investment. (who the heck knows?)

 

This may be due to the fact that they are the only planes that can achieve speeds over 100 kts. Try to release a full cockpit on a plane that can go 300-600kts and see how many people will fly it. Perhaps it will (most likely) be the most popular plane in the game. Just saying...

[Azone 39]

This may be due to the fact that they are the only planes that can achieve speeds over 100 kts. Try to release a full cockpit on a plane that can go 300-600kts and see how many people will fly it. Perhaps it will (most likely) be the most popular plane in the game. Just saying...

 

Over 100 knots?....Maule..RV..well over 100.

[razorhog703 15]

Over 100 knots?....Maule..RV..well over 100.

 

Well over 100? I have never got the RV over 120 kts (cruise). What speeds can you achieve? Perhaps going straight down from 20,000ft can get you at 500 kts, this is totally worthless when flying from point A to point B.