What is odd is that they will only do the 200Adv. This market is really a small one and if a good developer jump on a project like this and create only a single version, where the other version are similar and need just small work it's really odd. If you compare to the average of the entire project doing a 100 it' just a small step and they can still sell it as a second option. A nice thing could be buying all the version and have the freedom of choose the equipment and avionics but that is a dream : ) The same thing happen for the DC9 they only did a -30 where the -50 was largely used, we are lucky that they will do a cargo as I seen on a screenshot.

What is odd is that they will only do the 200Adv. This market is really a small one and if a good developer jump on a project like this and create only a single version, where the other version are similar and need just small work it's really odd. If you compare to the average of the entire project doing a 100 it' just a small step and they can still sell it as a second option. A nice thing could be buying all the version and have the freedom of choose the equipment and avionics but that is a dream : ) The same thing happen for the DC9 they only did a -30 where the -50 was largely used, we are lucky that they will do a cargo as I seen on a screenshot.

 

Perhaps they only had access to those specific aircraft? I know that is the case with most developers; they model the version of whatever actual airplane they can physically have access to.

 

Sent from my GT-N8013 using Tapatalk HD

99% of the time, we, Milviz, only ever do one variant/version.  We just try and make sure that one is done well... 

There is no such thing as "just small work" when referring to 3d models. What appears simple isn't... :wacko:

There is no such thing as "just small work" when referring to 3d models. What appears simple isn't... :wacko:

 

The number of times i have tried to make some "small" tweaks on a 3D model and abandoned it in disgust to go back to programming...

The number of times i have tried to make some "small" tweaks on a 3D model and abandoned it in disgust to go back to programming..

For me was the opposite, the only part where I was sad in develop in 3D, it was for the 4mm bug in FS9 which destroy all my 3D gauge.

There is no such thing as "just small work" when referring to 3d models. What appears simple isn't...

But if you take the overall project of the 200ADV you just created and start a 100 version how much it will take to adapt in % compare to the 200.

Anyway I only express my feeling to have all version and I don't want to bother all of you, it's fine if at list we got finally a good 732.

To be clear, there are pretty BIG differences between the 200ADV and the 100... not least of which is the following list (external only because the cockpit is another story entirely)...

 

1) wings

2) slats

3) spoilers

4) flaps

5) main landing gear and related bays

6) thrust reversers

7) engines

8) length of the plane in front and behind the wings

9) nose gear (steering mechanism, oleo's and strut

 

Just to redo all those would take a considerable amount of time, effort and, of course, money.  So, whilst we don't mind if you repaint our (or anyone else's for that matter) plane in the 100's colors... it's not something that we're going to make.

 

I do apologize and, of course, we get this all the time.  The truth is that, for us anyway, doing more than one variant with all it's subversions (gravel kit, FMS, cargo/combi/pax) has proven more than difficult enough...  We may never do another tube.  (if we did, it would NOT be a 100, that much is for sure)

 

We are now in the final stages of coding this beast and a beast it is... 

And when it's finished it will be so cool! I love old aircrafts! :-D<br /><br />Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk 2<br /><br />

This is going to be the best jurassic 737 out there, solely because Bill Leaming is involved in its development.

 

 

 

Does it have a VC?  Not from what I recall... though I only used the original FS2002/2004 version with 2D panel.

 

Well, it has one now.

 

 

It's aimed at a completely different audience though. (Namely the one without money.)

 

 

For me was the opposite, the only part where I was sad in develop in 3D, it was for the 4mm bug in FS9 which destroy all my 3D gauge.

 

The "4mm bug" isn't a bug, but a setting which can be disabled.

I'm successfully exporting very small parts for FS9 on a regular basis after disabling said setting.

The "4mm bug" isn't a bug, but a setting which can be disabled.

I'm successfully exporting very small parts for FS9 on a regular basis after disabling said setting.

If I knew at that time back in 2005 I sure I would have more hair

Today with FSX is really another way to work and less painful.

If indeed you are making an Adv. can you include a European Aviation AirCharter repaint

 

I check my emails twice a day hoping to receive my download link

We may never do another tube.  (if we did, it would NOT be a 100, that much is for sure)

 

 

 

Damn :(

 

I was hoping for a 727, DC-8 or 747-100/200/300

 

or how about an ATP? A few freighters still flying around, West Air in Europe is one.

FWIW I am hoping against hope that the boss may some day relent and do either a 727 or a 707 (my 2 favorite tubes) but i stopped bugging him about it a while back and im not about to start up again given how much is going on...

if, and it's a BIG if, we were to do another tube of this type, it would be the KC-135...BUT... this is not saying that we ARE or even MIGHT do one... just that's the ONLY one I would be thinking of doing...  other than some transport of some kind maybe...

 

Don't get any ideas... 

Well if you decide not to do jetliners, an ATP or Saab 340 would be nice. With the Saab you could also do the military and freighter variant too.