Maybe a PMDG A380?

[johnor999 0]

The way I see it, PMDG would require similar contacts and contracts with Airbus to be able to make an Airbus at the same level as NGX & 777. No doubths the modern Airbus airplanes are money makers and if it only came down to sales numbers, PMDG would probably go for it. All companies want to use as little energy as possible but still get as good results as possible. From that perspective it's wise to stick to whatever resources the company already have available.

 

I'd guess that if a complex aircraft is made after the 747 V2, it's very likely to be a Boeing.

[Richard Avenido 5]

Aerosoft has never developed a complex aircraft and will likely never do so as they're mostly a publisher. They do create very well polished products though, like the Airbus X.

yes i agree although its not as complex as the PMDG or WILCO but yeah  Airbus X is a very well polished product

[boxman83 32]

The way I see it, PMDG would require similar contacts and contracts with Airbus to be able to make an Airbus at the same level as NGX & 777. No doubths the modern Airbus airplanes are money makers and if it only came down to sales numbers, PMDG would probably go for it. All companies want to use as little energy as possible but still get as good results as possible. From that perspective it's wise to stick to whatever resources the company already have available.

 

I'd guess that if a complex aircraft is made after the 747 V2, it's very likely to be a Boeing.

 

Maybe they could go back to their roots and produce another 757. Or the 787.

 

-jp

[WR269 367]

The way I see it, PMDG would require similar contacts and contracts with Airbus to be able to make an Airbus at the same level as NGX & 777. No doubths the modern Airbus airplanes are money makers and if it only came down to sales numbers, PMDG would probably go for it. All companies want to use as little energy as possible but still get as good results as possible. From that perspective it's wise to stick to whatever resources the company already have available.

 

I'd guess that if a complex aircraft is made after the 747 V2, it's very likely to be a Boeing.

 

Aerosoft, BBS and FSL managed to get all the documentation and access to aircraft to make of it whatever they wished, there is no reason a company like PMDG would not be able to do the same.

 

It all comes down to marketing. If PMDG decides there is an aircraft out there that would be popular with simmers, they will do it, that was the jist of the Munich presentation.

 

At the moment, nobody but those in the inner core of PMDG know what is coming next, and am glad Ryan (Tabs) put to bed that silly speculation of a "special" and "exclusive" deal with Boeing which meant they could not touch other manufacturers.

 

PMDG is a shrewd developer, and I look forward to the realisation of the next wave of add ons, which no doubt is constantly being discussed.

[Avantime 81]

Aerosoft, BBS and FSL managed to get all the documentation and access to aircraft to make of it whatever they wished, there is no reason a company like PMDG would not be able to do the same.

 

It all comes down to marketing. If PMDG decides there is an aircraft out there that would be popular with simmers, they will do it, that was the jist of the Munich presentation.

 

At the moment, nobody but those in the inner core of PMDG know what is coming next, and am glad Ryan (Tabs) put to bed that silly speculation of a "special" and "exclusive" deal with Boeing which meant they could not touch other manufacturers.

 

PMDG is a shrewd developer, and I look forward to the realisation of the next wave of add ons, which no doubt is constantly being discussed.

 

The problem with the Airbus is that a lot of systems logic and software are not well documented because they work their magic in the background and the only way one can do a PMDG quality addon is to delve into more proprietary information or get access to knowledgable people in Airbus, either still working or retired. Operator manuals alone are generally not enough.

 

Also you have to deal with the fact that a developer in the caliber of PMDG would have to deal with not just Airbus but Thales, Honeywell, L-3 etc. For example the Airbus FCOMs doesn't tell you how the autopilot bank angle limiter works or any of its logic, and you have to dig into the Honeywell FMGC manual to find it.

 

And then there are the software revisions.....

[FLEX1978 373]

The problem with the Airbus is that a lot of systems logic and software are not well documented because they work their magic in the background and the only way one can do a PMDG quality addon is to delve into more proprietary information or get access to knowledgable people in Airbus, either still working or retired. Operator manuals alone are generally not enough.

 

Also you have to deal with the fact that a developer in the caliber of PMDG would have to deal with not just Airbus but Thales, Honeywell, L-3 etc. For example the Airbus FCOMs doesn't tell you how the autopilot bank angle limiter works or any of its logic, and you have to dig into the Honeywell FMGC manual to find it.

 

And then there are the software revisions.....

Personally I do not see that as an obstacle for PMDG, they simply do not want to do an Airbus at this moment in time. Putting aside the fact that all the information required is freely available online, if PMDG announced they wanted to do an airbus and required a few type rated guy's and engineers for Beta testing it would be full in a day.

 

Regarding software revisions, do any developers get into that territory? Have you seen how many software revisions are available on the A320 and all other modern airliners? Most devs pick a single aircraft from a fleet and model it.

[Avantime 81]

Personally I do not see that as an obstacle for PMDG, they simply do not want to do an Airbus at this moment in time. Putting aside the fact that all the information required is freely available online, if PMDG announced they wanted to do an airbus and required a few type rated guy's and engineers for Beta testing it would be full in a day.

 

Regarding software revisions, do any developers get into that territory? Have you seen how many software revisions are available on the A320 and all other modern airliners? Most devs pick a single aircraft from a fleet and model it.

 

I agree it's not that big of an obstacle, but it would require building new networks and relationships. Consider that PMDG already has a lot Boeing expertise it would only be prudent for them to 'milk it' to its fullest. I'm not an expert on Airbuses so I'll leave the software revision question to others who are more knowledgeable. 

[Joakim 39]

I'd rather have more Boeing with technology and buttons. Than a Airbus with almost nothing in it. And considering Rob's thousand of hours in Boeings, and PMDG's close relationship with Boeing i doubt a a380

[RP-C3272 0]

100% no. They won't develop A380 and any airbus planes because PMDG focus is on Boeing

[scandinavian13 5,192]

 

...do people still use that logic?

 

There is a relationship with Boeing based on past products and their work with them.  If their focus on Boeing meant they wouldn't produce other planes, I'd like to hear the theory of how the MD-11 and Jetstream 4100 came about...

[FLEX1978 373]

If it wasn't so annoying Kyle it would be amusing

[scandinavian13 5,192]

If it wasn't so annoying Kyle it would be amusing

 

True!

 

Kinda like how watching Office Space is amusing until you're in the same situations:

 

(I'm hoping at least one person hears the quote in their mind, just from the picture.)

[MMartinov 48]

Looking at the current market, the one company that pull it off is called PMDG. So even though I'm not an A380 fan, if they decide to let the customers vote for their upcoming products I would tick the Superbus..

[Airbusman330 300]

 

 

(I'm hoping at least one person hears the quote in their mind, just from the picture.)

 

Awesome movie.

[richtemark 13]

The problem with the Airbus is that a lot of systems logic and software are not well documented because they work their magic in the background and the only way one can do a PMDG quality addon is to delve into more proprietary information or get access to knowledgable people in Airbus, either still working or retired. Operator manuals alone are generally not enough.

 

I am certain that all system logic and software of any aircraft is documented to the very last detail since such documentation is required for any aircraft certification process. The question is rather (besides PMDGs business decision if they see a market for such plane) if Airbus would agree to give access to this documentation. No idea, but if Boeing did, why wouldn't Airbus do?

 

Personally, I would be very happy with a A380 by PMDG because it is a fantastic plane and PMDG, in my opinion, is the only company that could create it in a way that would satisfy me. Then again, I also wouldn't say no to a 787 :rolleyes:

 

Cheers,

Markus