LM almost certainly put a provision in their agreement with MS - that they would have EXCLUSIVE use of FSX for the duration of the contract. (I think it highly unlikely that MS sold the rights in perpetuity.) 

Don't expect any licence agreements to others in the near future.

 

A related thought re P3D and the decision by PMDG to NOT provide an FX 2D panel for their new 777  :

A professional version of 777 running solely on the P3D platform might command a significantly higher price and be a nice additional source of revenue for PMDG.

Remember that PMDG originally started as an organization publishing training manuals!

And Robert Randazzo is a professional pilot.

If such proves to be the case, the P3D version would have to be in a 2D format, per FAA regs that require all instruments, gauges, switches etc to be in a fixed location - panning & zooming not permitted.

That might explain the omission of a 2D panel for FX T7 users.

january

 

ESP and FSX were separate programs. AFAIK LM didn't license FSX and FSX isn't rated for real flight training.  Otherwise MS probably wouldn't have made Flight.

MS ESP is the commercial use version of FSX SP2 and was renamed by Lockheed Martin as Prepare 3D when they purchased rights to it in 2009.

FSX is not rated for flight training - the rating applies to the training device itself and how it functions.

One of the FAA requirements for device certification is that any instruments, gauges, switches etc remain in a fixed location on the unit or display screen. 

So panning and zooming is not permitted in an approved device but presumably 2D format/presentation could be acceptable.

january

I'm not sure how you can use P3D for training with out getting it certified, I worked in a sim center for several years. ATDs and PCADs were the lowest things we had. So for P3D used for training on your home computer you cant log the time, So I don't understand all the hopla about its for training... If you want to get something certified buy a redbird or a frasca.

If they were smart they'd buy the code to Flight versus FSX. Lockheed is having a hell of a time working with that buggy code. Even with the few Aces members they've hired it's still slow going...

 

While the Flight engine definitely had some amazing technology, I don't think it holds the extensive code for some of the advanced features that FSX has. Throwing away the FSX code just because it's buggy would be absolutely silly. It's a very solid platform, it just needs some love (which is what Lockheed has been giving it despite having a very small team). I doubt they have a team of 50+ people like Flight had, which will surely cause updates to take longer. But hey, are there things from Flight that Prepar3D would benefit from? Sure! The new autogen and weather systems are far more advanced than those in FSX.

It wouldn't be a true release for us without a giant novel-post by Dillon telling everyone how terrible our business decisions are now would it?

 

The fact that he's done this after basically every release I can remember since I've been at the company (with all the previous ones it was dire prognosticating about how stupid we were for not going back to FS9) combined with the fact that we're still here and thriving after all these years should tell you all something about his actual level of knowledge about this industry shouldn't it? If he were right about these things PMDG would not be in business today.

Please don't take this the wrong way, but some of you are going to worry yourselves right into the pine box, if you're not careful!
 

What's the use of worrying about something that you (or we, as a Community) have absolutely no control over? MS, L/M, Laminar, PMDG and everyone else make decisions for the good of their company. We may not agree with those decisions, but hey... that's the way the World works. No 2D Panel? Oh well... 

 

Worry about things y'all have control over; learning to fly the Triple 7 by the numbers. Tweaking your rig (whatever it is), so it runs FlightSIm the best that it can.

 

It wouldn't be a true release for us without a giant novel-post by Dillon telling everyone how terrible our business decisions are now would it?

 

The fact that he's done this after basically every release I can remember since I've been at the company (with all the previous ones it was dire prognosticating about how stupid we were for not going back to FS9) combined with the fact that we're still here and thriving after all these years should tell you all something about his actual level of knowledge about this industry shouldn't it? If he were right about these things PMDG would not be in business today.

Lol, well stated and true. I remember those posts by Dillon.

... (with all the previous ones it was dire prognosticating about how stupid we were for not going back to FS9) ...

 

 

There are reasons to stick to FS9, but there are no reasons to revert from FSX back to FS9.

 

And even the 'stick to FS9' argument shows after years of improving hardware performance and declining hardware prices.

There are reasons to stick to FS9

 

Name one.

 

I have to say, PMDG, Flight1, Aerosoft are all large enough to make their own bare bones flight simulator if they needed to. All they have to do is make the bare bones sim and let third parties populate it.

Name one.

 

 

Expenses for a new rig.

What Ryan said ^^

 

And while I can see where you are coming from Dillon, I totally disagree with your rationale and predictions.

 

FLIGHT was/is a totally diferent kelttle of fish for MS. It was/is a "new" direction in flight simming for them; less a sim, more of an easy-access title for the less nerdy.

 

They invested a whole load of new $$ into it. As such it is still very much current IP; and I think that the code will be used at some point by someone for a "new" sim, but that's my opinion, nothing more.

 

The FLIGHT/FSX conversation was done to death anyway so I'm not going there any more. They do still make money from selling FSX, even though it's "dead" code. When they finally make it EOL properly, I will continue to use it. If I can't activate it when I rebuild my PC, I will find a way around that. I can still install and use very old MS softs like Office 97 and 2000 (not that I'd want to but...)

 

Personally, I really do think that we will be able to play it for years to come, new sims notwithstanding. As has been mentioned a few times, if it goes west, people will use cracked EXE's.

 

Look at Falcon 4 as a marker for where FSX could be in a few years. Supported by the community, You really think MS will sue ppl who still want to use FSX years after it goes west?

 

I hope for a new platform, similar in scope and execution to FSX, too, but I'm a pragmatist; I don't think there will be one on the horizon for a while. I hope I'm wrong, but who really knows?

 

I'd never use XP because it just doesn't work for me. I don't like the UI, I don't like the way it works, and I don't like the limited (in comparison to FSX) support from the devs I like to buy my softs from.

 

Anyway, each to their own. Mine is and will be FSX for some time to come. If that makes me a darwinian dead-end, so be it!

 

best

 

jake

Expenses for a new rig.

 

No, what reason is there for PMDG to stick with FS9.

It wouldn't be a true release for us without a giant novel-post by Dillon telling everyone how terrible our business decisions are now would it?

 

The fact that he's done this after basically every release I can remember since I've been at the company (with all the previous ones it was dire prognosticating about how stupid we were for not going back to FS9) combined with the fact that we're still here and thriving after all these years should tell you all something about his actual level of knowledge about this industry shouldn't it? If he were right about these things PMDG would not be in business today.

Well said Ryan! :Applause:

 

Kind regards.

No, what reason is there for PMDG to stick with FS9.

He did not say there was. You may have misunderstood.

No, what reason is there for PMDG to stick with FS9.

 

 

He did not say there was. You may have misunderstood.

 

 

I may have misunderstood.  

 

No reasons for PMDG to stick to FS9.