IMHO the 787 would be the next logic step after they have finished all what they announced so far. Airbus would be another thing but I don't believe in that.

Its funny that a major factor in not making a 757/767 is that they claim these planes are being retired from service and will be gone soon when if anything the 747-400 is the plane that's being let go of rapidly. The 757/767 will be around a lot longer than the 747-400 I reckon .  Most airlines are dumping the -400, with JAL and ANA having dumped theirs, Air France's will be gone in 2016, United and Delta likely by 2019, Qantas this year (save the ER till '18), Cathay Pacific this year, Asiana this year, and Air New Zealand this year.  If the schedule for the 747v2 is the same as the NGX and 777 (Aug 2011, Aug 2013) and we see it in August 2015, very few airlines will still have them in service, and the -8 will be limited to 4 carriers: Lufthansa, Korean, Arik, and Transaero.  

 

That is true. Lufthansa however will keep thirteen -400's in their fleet for a longer period of time alongside their -8i's. I think the future of all 400's will be in the form of a conversion to freighters. And yes, the above mentioned airlines are so far the only customers who had enough interest in the new 'dash eight' to place orders. After all it looks like the era of 4-engined airliners is over due to their fuel-economy. If it weren't for Emirates the A380 would have also been not quite of a success story... Emirates CEO Tim Clark stated in an interview some time ago that the airline is quite satisfied with the product and is able to make profit with it, however they would welcome a more fuel-saving, re-engined version of the 380 to secure the future of this particular type. 

 

Anyway, I agree that the 787 would be the most-logical step after the announced products are released (and updated with their respective SP's) since it is very similar to a 777, despite the fact that it is a new generation of an airliner, really.

I too would love to see PMDG bring the mighty 767 back to life

Also,

 

I assume that in terms of modelling the electronics and FBW systems, the slightly older planes would be easier to replicate faithfully in FSX?

 

The 787 is built on a moving Airport map, a full EFB. I think it pretty much defines the aircraft but at the moment I don't see PMDG modelling one.

 

A 767 however, is closer to the 747-400 and I would think it would be on the same level of complexity to bring to our FSX

 

Alex

Anyway, I agree that the 787 would be the most-logical step after the announced products are released (and updated with their respective SP's) since it is very similar to a 777, despite the fact that it is a new generation of an airliner, really.

I don't know how much similarities there are between the 777 and 787. I don't see many except they are built by the same manufacturer. What I think is, that the 787 will likely have the best chances as a flight sim product. Everybody knows it, it is modern and interesting. It will be produced in loads. Many airlines will be flying them. You will see them at many airports. To summarize, it won't be a niche aircraft... PMDG stated these factors will influence their decision on future products.

 

Also,

 

I assume that in terms of modelling the electronics and FBW systems, the slightly older planes would be easier to replicate faithfully in FSX?

 

The 787 is built on a moving Airport map, a full EFB. I think it pretty much defines the aircraft but at the moment I don't see PMDG modelling one.

 

A 767 however, is closer to the 747-400 and I would think it would be on the same level of complexity to bring to our FSX

 

Alex

Good points!

I'm quite certain that there's quite a bit in common between the 777 and 787 (I remember reading somewhere that they share a type rating), but my specialty is more geared towards Army aviation than the commercial side (for now, anyway).

Yeah, well 737-100 shares a rating with 737-900ER and in all probability will also share a rating with the 737-8MAX, so... there is more of a difference then you might think, although the manner of operation will be very similar.

My apologies to Arjen for making another request. 

 

Yes, I know there are payware versions already out there.  I know because I've BOUGHT them, only to find that they do not work with my configuration.  Level-D's 767 locks up FSX on my computer before you even get to the aircraft selection screen.  CaptainSim's version is missing displays and switches/controls are non-functional when they should be. 

 

What is it about my configuration that throws those respected paywares for a loop?  I run Win 8.1, FSX w/Accel Pack in DirectX10 mode, and I run a three-wide display using nVidia's Surround technology. Those companies do not officialy support their products on Win 8.1. 

 

Why do I think a PMDG product would do any better?  Even though PMDG ALSO does not officially support Win 8.1, their 737NGX product works flawlessly with my setup. Obviously PMDG's method of doing things is superior to the other payware developers. 

 

One of the first products developed by PMDG was the 767 for "Fly!" so it wouldn't be as if they would have to start a new 767 project totally from scratch.

 

I do not expect a response from PMDG on this thread because it's always a bad idea to say "Yes, we'll do it." or "No, it can't be done." only to have circumstances change down the road. I merely wanted to put a bug in their ear that there is at least SOME interest should such a product be developed.  If it happens, I'll be happy.  If it never sees the light of day, I'll muddle through somehow.

 

 

Long thread simple answer, ditch Windows 8.1.  :Cuppa:

 

 

A 767 however, is closer to the 747-400 and I would think it would be on the same level of complexity to bring to our FSX

Not close enough to mean it would not be a clean sheet of paper design to create. Apart from the engines, there's little commonality between the 767 and 747-400.

 

Simulating FBW is not really an obstacle in FSX. Several Airbus and Embraer addons have had it, a couple dating back to FS2002. Once PMDG have perfected it with 777 SP1, the same solution would be applicable in principle to a 787 addon.

The 787 does have extra features such as dropping ailerons, automatic spoiler, and a few more, but the HGS system is pretty clse to the NGX  I believe. Nevertheless, the 787 is almost a definite thing, seeing as the 747-8 simulation's GEnx-2b's are SO close to the GEnx-1B on the 787.

Not close enough to mean it would not be a clean sheet of paper design to create. Apart from the engines, there's little commonality between the 767 and 747-400.

 

Simulating FBW is not really an obstacle in FSX. Several Airbus and Embraer addons have had it, a couple dating back to FS2002. Once PMDG have perfected it with 777 SP1, the same solution would be applicable in principle to a 787 addon.

 

No it wouldn't be a clean sheet. But most of the logic (due to them being designed in roughly the same period (B744 - B763 comparison)).

 

The FBW is a tricky one, I haven't seen one developer pull it off authentically yet. We'll see what Sp1 brings.

A lot of people here need to take a visit to the support forums of LVLD....

 

You upgrade your VC to the latest offered on the forums (for license holders)

You update to the new lights offered on the forums (for license holders)

 

You buy TSS sound upgrade for the LVLD

and you buy a McPhat HD Livery package for it....

 

After your complete these you have a pretty good and up-to-date addon. The LVLD is great on frames as-well & I still think its one of the greatest addons from a flight dynamic perspective that simmers have seen.

 

Best thing also, works in P3Dv2 perfectly!  :lol:

No it wouldn't be a clean sheet. But most of the logic (due to them being designed in roughly the same period (B744 - B763 comparison)).

 

The FBW is a tricky one, I haven't seen one developer pull it off authentically yet. We'll see what Sp1 brings.

The 744 is about seven years newer than the 762 (the 763 is later but has same systems and technology). There are some similarities of course.

 

How well FBW is done is down to the developer, but adding FBW to FSX isn't a problem. I think it's been done well enough in FSX, compared to full flight sims I've flown.