Hi

 

If it is all about money, would you ever donate to a developer who needs financial support in order to design a realistic 330/340? If they state that they will start working on the most realistic 330/340 if they are well financially supported, will most of us spend tens of Dollars? I don't know how much it takes to start the project but I think there are many of us who will be among the first to donate. There are enormous aspects to consider but this may stimulate ideas for those who is dare enough. So, if one has donated $50, he will only have to pay another $25 for a $75 330/340 package when it is released?? Bad idea??

 

Again, if it is all about money....

 

Some of us just long this in our Flight Simulator 'Aircraft' menu

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D79BDzyxzM0

I already 'donate' to developers by purchasing products that I use and some I don't use. On the occasions that I purchase an add-on I don't use it is more because I want to see what it is like and help fund them on future projects so they can continue to work.

 

I won't say which developers I do this for but I do this for some already, It is important to me that this hobby remains sustainable for the developers.

 

Cheers

I've been waiting for this series for ages as well for medium ranged operations which I feel are the sweet spot with regards to time expenditure with the A330. The Level-D is dated and not as pretty a bird in my opinion. To answer your question, I would be comfortable doing so only with companies with a reputation with delivering excellent products. But 50$ hardly a small chunk of change and most people have other priorities in life so really I'd say its a rather silly to spend your monies like that.

Not sure if I have missed the point of this post (including the developer concerned), but surely this is a venture capital question?

 

Regardless of the amount involved, surely if you are asking for an outside investment (i.e. other peoples money) to start working on a project without a guarantee of success, it is fair to provide an adequate return on investment if that project is successful (plus a share of the profits)?

 

What you are suggesting here is that if I "invest" $50 upfront without any guarantee of completion of product to saleable standard, I then have to pay another $25 upon completion (IF completed).

 

In other words buy the product at the same price?

 

You have got to be kidding me.

There are things to be considered that including risks. No one thinks that a developer that has designed excellent aircraft for the past 10 years or so would really need the donation to survive, and it is not meant that way anyway.. They are wealthy as their products have always been successful. T

 

The idea about this 'enthusiasts' financial contribution' is to persuade them to set their priority in designing their next product based on what simmers expect. I am one of (few?) who doesn't get too excited about DC 6 release. My guess is it is easier to make. If FBW philosophy were that simple, we could have a bug-free sidestick by now

 

There may be an independent auditor or such, perhaps from the AVSIM staffs, people who are well known and reliable. I am one of those friendly stubborn fs9ers. We are aware that fs9 hasn't been the first market for developers since 2010 (iFly and Maddog were released that year, I have both). However, they might be surprised with the amount of investment we might spend. If donating could turn their priority to what has been expected by simmers, they got less to lose. I really really doubt that a good 330/340 would be a total flop. It doesnt take a Harvard genius to realize this.

 

I thought that repetitively whining for a good 330/340 would be such a waste and childish thus an idea should do better

 

 

Retard

I've been burned twice pre-paying for Sim add-ons. No names, no pack drill but the second was very well publicised.

 

You aren't going to want to hear this (I suspect) but the reality is the narrower you focus your interests in life the less options become available.

 

Whilst there's nothing wrong with sticking with FS9, Airliners OR Highly procedural aircraft it does rather limit what the hobby has to offer. As was pointed out in a recent documentary about the loss of the Air France Airbus in the South Atlantic the sum total of "Actual hands-on flying" for crews of these aircraft is measured in minutes. I'm sure individual FMC's all have their quirks and procedures but the great thing about the DC6 is that you'll actually have to fly it AND navigate it AND manage the engines.

 

Personally I spend more money on scenery than aircraft but then anything much bigger than a DC3 (even smaller in modern aircraft) bores me rigid. Low and slow, in all weathers, in and out of tight strips using nothing but a "steam" cockpit without GPS is much more of a challenge and the best scenery is now for FSX and P3D.

 

That's just my take on it of course, but I'd suggest that there are more takers for that than a new high procedural jet airliner for FS9? FSX might be a closer run argument of course.

 

On a more positive note why not take the best available 330/340 for the sim and customise it yourself? There are many utilities and specific add-ons for sound, nav sytems etc. This may mean spending time learning how to do such tweaks (?) but that in itself adds a new dimension to the hobby.

 

Good luck with your wish anyway.

 

Geoff

I think FSlabs is going to make A330/A340 after they have released their A320.

There are things to be considered that including risks. No one thinks that a developer that has designed excellent aircraft for the past 10 years or so would really need the donation to survive, and it is not meant that way anyway.. They are wealthy as their products have always been successful. T

 

The idea about this 'enthusiasts' financial contribution' is to persuade them to set their priority in designing their next product based on what simmers expect. I am one of (few?) who doesn't get too excited about DC 6 release. My guess is it is easier to make. If FBW philosophy were that simple, we could have a bug-free sidestick by now

 

There may be an independent auditor or such, perhaps from the AVSIM staffs, people who are well known and reliable. I am one of those friendly stubborn fs9ers. We are aware that fs9 hasn't been the first market for developers since 2010 (iFly and Maddog were released that year, I have both). However, they might be surprised with the amount of investment we might spend. If donating could turn their priority to what has been expected by simmers, they got less to lose. I really really doubt that a good 330/340 would be a total flop. It doesnt take a Harvard genius to realize this.

 

I thought that repetitively whining for a good 330/340 would be such a waste and childish thus an idea should do better

 

 

Retard

 

Basically you're proposing the pre-order business model adopted by Captain Sim, Blackbox and Airsimmer, except that instead of selling people a partially functional / beta version, they won't receive anything, except a discount on a final product that will probably only appear several years in the future (and we all know how good software developers are at meeting their release dates). Not my cup of tea, there are too many unknowns and risks involved. Just because someone is well known for making good products doesn't guarantee that their next product will also be good for starters, it just makes the chance greater. I prefer to wait for the reviews.

 

On a side-note, I realise the call 'retard' (as the imperative form of the verb 'to retard') is part of a normal landing in an A330/A340; but here you appear to have used it as a noun and applied it to someone who didn't happen to share your opinion, which is not really a very nice thing to do .

 

I think FSlabs is going to make A330/A340 after they have released their A320.

 

If I remember the FSL forums correctly they intend to do the A321 and A319 after the A320 is released, and then work on another Airbus model (it's called the A3XX master series for a reason after all). Which was undecided though. Either way an FSL A330/340 is several years away at best (wild guess on my part, based on how long the A320 has been in development).

Ok could be so then, just saw a topic in here Avsim where some guy from FSlabs said that they are going to develop A330 at some point.

 

But I would imagine that making A321 and A319 won't really take as much time as A320 has done, A321 & A319 after all have very little difference from A320 in terms of systems, and same mostly goes with A330/A340 too I think, so they probably just have to modify systems that they already created for A320.

That's true, FS Labs will make A330 for sure, and if i remember well from their forums - even A340

Flight sim labs have publicly stated that the will indeed be be producing an A321 and A319 immediately following the current A320, and then the A330 straight after that. I believe Andrew made a post to that effect on the FSX Forum on here on Avsim. This is due to the fact that they wish to take advantage of the the much shorter development time of adding on to the Airbus A3XX series due to the fact that they've already produced the ARINC protocol that is used across the fleet.

 

Regards,

Ró.