Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

hangar

Calling All Payware Plane Developers :-)

Recommended Posts

I've been wondering about this for maybe 6 or 7 years now so I have to ask because I'm a bit baffled. Why, after so many FSX years gone by, do we not have any super high quality GA jets yet?

 

It seem that when it comes to GA single and twin props there is a relative plethora to choose from, with many being of very high caliber in quality. Yet, when it comes to really high quality GA JETS the only game in town has been the CitationX from Eaglesoft and the Cessna Mustang from Flight1, both of which are sorely in need of some modeling and systems upgrading at this point.

 

Seems every month there is a new high end commercial jet on offer, but nothing new for GA jets at all. Come on guys....give us a new Mustang, or Phenom, or Beechjet...or whatever....just make it PMDG worthy PLEASE!

 

I guess there's no market for it...but I'd really love to see something with Carenado style graphics, PMDG style systems, and while you're at it might as well throw in some Rob Young from RealAir too!

 

...ah well...maybe one day when im dead & buried, heh. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would anyone make something if there is no market for it besides you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I don't think it's just the OP %5Burl= but yes I think the point is fair;   Devs have always said that the 'corporate jet' market within the hobby sits behind Airliner, GA Prop, and Military (so 4th position in a small total market) ...... the lead times and development overheads involved in creating PMDG-esque products, for what would be such a small market, probably make the projects financially unviable.

 

But where there is a limited market, there is also vast opportunity, as Eaglesoft proved, as the only mainstream developer of a corporate jet range.    Just a shame that their activity has been so quiet for quite a few years now.    Hopefully they'll be back in the future with a major new Corporate Jet project!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually our in progress Citation XLS for FSX only is intended to fit this bill along with a possible revision to the excellent CX 2.0 and Citation CJ1+ 2.0 but folks have to understand these things can't be spit out on short lead times so patience is the watchword.

There are also a few new projects on the boards but we can't say more at this time. B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually our in progress Citation XLS for FSX only is intended to fit this bill along with a possible revision to the excellent CX 2.0 and Citation CJ1+ 2.0 but folks have to understand these things can't be spit out on short lead times so patience is the watchword.

There are also a few new projects on the boards but we can't say more at this time. B)

 

Good choice on the XLS! Looking forward to it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Count me in as a customer for a high-quality business jet. Gosh Jim, that makes 2. Profits are up 100%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if I had something to say to the payware plane developers it would be, whatever you make (and I think Ryan makes a point):

  • Make it as complete as possible.  We should be able to fly the checklist.
  • Speeds, power settings should all be right
  • VC has to be high quality
  • Make buttons and switches consistent

I have a bunch of airplanes...some are hangared but some I keep flying.  I go back to the ones that are complete and I'd easily pay for Version 2 on any of them.  More complete is more interesting than another mediocre airplane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does the Xtreme prototype Lear package get left out of these conversations?

 

oh yeah, I know why. Like the real ones, it has no FMC so you have to actually fly it.

 

It isn't perfect, but it is pretty good.

 

regards,

Joe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does the Xtreme prototype Lear package get left out of these conversations?

 

oh yeah, I know why. Like the real ones, it has no FMC so you have to actually fly it.

 

It isn't perfect, but it is pretty good.

 

regards,

Joe

IMO.That things terrible and not just because it doesn't have advanced avionics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why does the Xtreme prototype Lear package get left out of these conversations?

 

oh yeah, I know why. Like the real ones, it has no FMC so you have to actually fly it.

 

It isn't perfect, but it is pretty good.

 

regards,

Joe

 

I like it. Has personality.

 

I wish that you could put the RXP or ISG fms in the virtual cockpit.

 

That it have an option to have no gps at all

 

Lee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason we don't see more is there is no making you lot (me included) happy, so why waste the time LOL. heck read the OPs original statement, he isn't asking for much, just everything AND the kitchen sink in a model.

 

I'd like to see more biz jets myself. hard to believe that they are not as popular as airliners of which I have no interest in (NGX who??). there are certain criteria for me on addon aircraft, one is performance, I have my sim where it needs to be and will not turn down settings to accommodate a FPS hungry, unoptimized model, no matter how good it is (which is why I never got the Mustang, way to many reports on bad performance). Second is graphics, if it doesn't immerse me in reality in the VC graphically, I'll pass. Third is systems, it can have all the bells and whistles it wants, but if there is no quick start where I can just get in and fly, I'll pass also.

I still want a Gulfstream, might actually have to make one myself. I can do the modeling, texturing and animations, but have no clue on anything else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


The reason we don't see more is there is no making you lot (me included) happy, so why waste the time LOL. heck read the OPs original statement, he isn't asking for much, just everything AND the kitchen sink in a model.

 

I thought that's why we kept buying airplanes despite having 10 in our hangar.  LOL.

 

 

 


I still want a Gulfstream

 

+1 Gulfstream.  All you need is a systems guy and Bernt Stolle and you're on your way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go for something new and innovative.  

 

HondaJet !!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1.

 

Look forward to Eagle Soft's XLS. Hope your textures are upgraded, the 2.0 series aircraft are...meh. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason we don't see more is there is no making you lot (me included) happy, so why waste the time LOL. heck read the OPs original statement, he isn't asking for much, just everything AND the kitchen sink in a model.

No, clearly what I'm asking for is something that has already been done...many times over by PMDG and Rob Young (only it has not yet been done in a GA jet...and that's what I'm asking for...no more or less).

 

By the way, Gulfstreams and other bizjets are better than nothing...but they're really not the class im talking about...im talking about GA mainly (meaning single pilot rated).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...(only it has not yet been done in a GA jet...and that's what I'm asking for...no more or less).

I'm curious, as you mentioned it in your OP, but what is missing from the Cessna Mustang? From all I have read, Cessna was happy with it. Why aren't you?

 

And if you want more planes that have "it", are you willing to pay for getting "it". And if the prices go up and the market shrinks, do you think the developers will give second thought to designing GA planes with "it"?

 

So again, please explain what "it" is and why "it" needs to be included.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


I'm curious, as you mentioned it in your OP, but what is missing from the Cessna Mustang? From all I have read, Cessna was happy with it. Why aren't you?

 

From the folks I talk to and my own experience with the Mustang, I still fly it from time to time.  it's ok but it lacks a set of small things (some of which I work on when I get the chance).  Most of the folks do like it some and some try to like it really hard.  They talk about things like:

  • Upgrading the VC.  Not by a lot...mostly making it a little less clean...some shadowing.  It does look kinda plastic and 2D in the VC compared to other airplanes.  I look at it and see that a couple of things replaced would send it a long way.  This seems like a little fix that would add a lot.
  • Consistent switch handling.  Makes it a pain.  Some switches work one way, other switches work another way. (To be fair, most airplanes have some inconsistency but the Mustang is somewhat harder).  Left should always be up, right should always be down IMO...mousewheel over the knob should always work.  The Mustang doesn't play as well with hardware so mouse interaction is more important.  You should be able to flip a switch or turn a knob as mindlessly as you can do it in the real Mustang.  You shouldn't have to think...um...how does this switch/knob work?
  • Probably the biggest thing is that it always lands so perfect and soundlessly no matter how poorly you land (well...how poorly *I* land).  If you land -200 fpm you should feel or hear something.  That short landing gear can only forgive so much.  The good news is that I've been working on that with Accufeel and EZDoc.  (I just got Accufeel so I'm still working on it.)  It's getting better. 
  • Being able to save flight plans in the G1000.  Some people (of course) want VNAV.  It'd be nice. 
  • Framerates.  I find them reasonable enough for myself but I understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I+1 Gulfstream.  All you need is a systems guy and Bernt Stolle and you're on your way.

 

And a stable of lawyers to fend off the General Dynamics corporate herds when they descend on you with a bag of lawsuits. They've made it abundantly clear they will not tolerate anyone simulating their products in a PC simulation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


And a stable of lawyers to fend off the General Dynamics corporate herds when they descend on you with a bag of lawsuits. They've made it abundantly clear they will not tolerate anyone simulating their products in a PC simulation.

 

Did they say why? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did they say why? 

Nothing publicly, but my "guess" is they're afraid of trade secrets leaking out and losing their competitive advantage. The business aviation market is a lot smaller and more competitive than commercial aviation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 


Nothing publicly, but my "guess" is they're afraid of trade secrets leaking out and losing their competitive advantage. The business aviation market is a lot smaller and more competitive than commercial aviation.

 

Well, there are others that are similar enough that would probably do just as well.  Maybe they're afraid their own pilots would use it and learn something bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suspect it's something to do with intellectual property of the design. It helped sink Flight (couldn't get the rights to sell their sim model for the dollars they were willing to pay), and may/does hurt the kitset model business. Basically, it is believed that someone is making money (or not, as the case may be) on the back of what the original manufacturer spent money to develop, and they don't like it. All seems a bit silly to me...

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a stable of lawyers to fend off the General Dynamics corporate herds when they descend on you with a bag of lawsuits. They've made it abundantly clear they will not tolerate anyone simulating their products in a PC simulation.

 

I've always thought it funny that there are more than 2 payware Gulfstreams available for the X-Plane market... how did they get away with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...