3 engines

Wonder what that's off. DC10? L1011? 727?

Almost certainly a DC-10. Northwest also had EIDS in their 747 classics so its possible it was in their 10s. Not the 727 though, or any L1011, as Penny & Giles only made JT9D and CF6 versions.

I'd hate to have one of those "classic" airliners. It's very difficult to fly single-handedly, what with the engineer's panels, old-style navigation systems, etc. Just my point of view.

Not that hard. They had INS to navigate and most 747 F/E panel systems only need occasional monitoring. Only the fuel panel needs regular attention. Anyone who has used the RFP 747 will know it's not difficult. But you can't leave it unattended on a long haul.

Many have voiced they want this beast, sadly no official announcement from any company.

 

Coming off the Captain Sim sale, I have way too many planes now to fly anyway so I'm no longer itching for other projects.

 

You have to realize that vocal minorities on forums can seem like "many" when they really aren't when our whole customer base (most of whom do not post on the forum) are considered. A 741/2 project would be largely just as complicated as doing the 400/-8 at this point for us given the fact that our glass/FMC system is largely portable between projects now. Doing a fully analog jet would actually be something out of the realm of our normal development now and might even take longer than the more advanced ones.

Maybe some day in the future, when FSX is still the standard "platform" for virtual aviation and every modern airliner will be available as a proper add-on, it's time to make classic beauties like the 741, L1011, DC-10 ...

It's clear PMDG won't be doing such classic jets. However others might do as good a job. QW did a fantastic 146/RJ recently for example, a classic albeit with some glass and an FMC. PMDG aren't the only quality FSX developer and it's pointless to keep pestering them to make niche products.

It's clear PMDG won't be doing such classic jets. However others might do as good a job. QW did a fantastic 146/RJ recently for example, a classic albeit with some glass and an FMC. PMDG aren't the only quality FSX developer and it's pointless to keep pestering them to make niche products.

Very true, but lets take the CLS 747-2/300.  nice model and all, but awful system modelling, f-lite which no one really wants and abysmal FDE.  More and more people want QW146 level of system depth as a minimum.

First of all i do not think that 747-100 is "niche product", do not measure everybody against same standard.

Second, now PMDG has this kind of reputation that whatever they will make will be sold as good and fast as fresh bread :-) 

 

Unfortunately we can skip and forget classics made by CLS, CS, JustFlight.

Very true, but lets take the CLS 747-2/300. nice model and all, but awful system modelling, f-lite which no one really wants and abysmal FDE. More and more people want QW146 level of system depth as a minimum.

Well obviously if the CLS 747 was any good people wouldn't be asking for a new 747 for FSX. I wouldn't say the QW 146 was the minimum. In some respects it's close to PMDG depth. Crucially the autopilot, FMC and engines. And support is excellent and responsive.

First of all i do not think that 747-100 is "niche product", do not measure everybody against same standard.

Second, now PMDG has this kind of reputation that whatever they will make will be sold as good and fast as fresh bread :-)

 

Unfortunately we can skip and forget classics made by CLS, CS, JustFlight.

I don't think the MD11 sold so well, despite it being a quality PMDG product. People buy what they are interested in. You don't spend $60 on an add-on you won't use.

 

CS quality is so variable that you can't really say whether it would be acceptable or not before it's released.