Cessna have no issues, along with many other manufacturers, so I don't see why Gulfstream should.

 

Actually, Cessna does not allow the use of their name in a payware product without a license of some sort, I believe. This is why not a single Carenado plane actually says Cessna in the name. :wink:

Who knows, rather than threatening to sue the pants of people, perhaps one day Gulfstream will grasp the real benefits from allowing developers to simulate their aircraft.

 

Because, from the perspective of an airplane manufacturer that makes large private jets, there is no benefit to allowing developers to create airplanes in FSX.

Its kind of ironic that the entire foundation of that company is based on USA tax payers subsidies.

Its kind of ironic that the entire foundation of that company is based on USA tax payers subsidies.

 

Lots of companies are; and that isn't applicable to just the US.  What's the point?

Figure it out yourself

Why wouldn an Aircraft company prevent a potential buyer from trying out one of their planes in FSX?  Hmmm...

 

Regards

jja

Figure it out yourself

 

I REALLY hope you're not trying to infer that Gulfstream should allow developers to create Gulfstream airplanes in FSX simply because General Dynamics is primarily supported by the American taxpayer....

Maybe no FSX developer asked them yet.

Anyone know?

Maybe Bill G. (MS) could put in a good word for the flight sim world??

Lots of companies are; and that isn't applicable to just the US. What's the point?

Socialism works!

 

If only more people in the benighted US recognized this fact.

 

Socialism works!

 

If only more people in the benighted US recognized this fact.

 

 

You mean enlightened since we do know better :rolleyes:

I still say we all chip in for this one and get it in FSX

 

http://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3d-private-gulfstream-model/599033

Well yes I was being just ever so slightly tongue in cheek; no system is any better than the people running it, ultimately.

 

But we've been particularly propagandized in the States to flee in horror at the very thought that there are alternatives to unfettered, rapacious business über alles as the definition of "freedom." For whom and to do what to whom, and why, these are the important questions no-one is answering these days, anywhere, no matter what form of government or economics.

 

Maybe we'll start to learn, maybe the rest of the world will remember, before it's too late.

 

But, back on topic: I like your recommendation!

 

Socialism works!

 

If only more people in the benighted US recognized this fact.

 

Socialism is a diaper for people who don't have the guts to be what they want to be.

"Gulfstream Aviation (or however they word it)"

- Actually it is Gulfstream Aerospace

 

"Because Gulfstream doesn't need 'brand awareness'."

- Actually we are very aware of our brand and how it is represented in the market

 

"Additionally, it is safe to say that no one playing Flight Sim is going to be buying a Gulfstream."

- You would probably be amusingly surprised to hear that one customer in particular, a wealthy individual who's name most would recognize, actually had a laptop in the cabin of his Gulfstream, and would frequently fly the route that he was actually traveling, flying along with Flight Sim! It was one of his favorite things to do onboard

 

"Training, demonstrations to potential customers etc. Cessna have no issues, along with many other manufacturers, so I don't see why Gulfstream should."

- How often have you heard someone right here on Avsim arguing performance and airframe capability "facts" that they are totally oblivious of, based on their 'thousands of hours of PIC time' in a Quality Wings/Capt Sim/PMDG/Lionheart/Carenado whatever verses some other pc simulation? Trust me, this is no venue for training, or demonstrations to customers for any manufacturer. Although some (most) manufacturers are agreeable to having their products represented in this format, training and customer demonstrations is not part of that acceptance.

 

"Why wouldn (sic) an Aircraft company prevent a potential buyer from trying out one of their planes in FSX?"

- Um...wow ..I once downloaded a Cessna 152 that cruised at 180 kts, and another time I downloaded a B-757 that could barely get off a 10,000 foot runway lightly loaded at sea level, so I can think of a few reasons.

 

 

With that all being said, although I am associated with a particular manufacturer of corporate aviation products, the opinions expressed are strictly my own, and do not represent the opinions or understandings of my employer or any one else.

Deleted

Socialism is a diaper for people who don't have the guts to be what they want to be.

Nice to hear from the Mayor of Irkutsk! It's been awhile.

 

Under communism, we'd have Gulfstream aircraft in FSX, is all I'm sayin'..... does anything else really matter?