Even more expensive when you have the professional p3d.

Glad Orbx is providing free p3d installers/licences thats the way you support your customers  :Applause:

Lol, I have to rebuy if I want the EXACT SAME plane in P3D? Unless they somehow make the plane much better in P3D with future updates I will just install the FSX version in P3D.

I had to to get the SkyMaster in all of my three sims...  I bought each Carenado version for FSX, FS9, and XPX.  Yessir...

 

The only break I had, was that I could take the FSX version over to P3D.  In fact I also did the same for the B90.....  I love flying these two planes, across all platforms...  I do though, understand your angst..in that FSX/P3D, could be seen as the cousin of the other....

 

 

Glad Orbx is providing free p3d installers/licences thats the way you support your customers 

 

Yes, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.  Liability risk is much greater (and therefore potentially costlier) when you make simulated aircraft, as opposed to scenery.

 

"I killed my passenger by doing something in my 172 that I learned to do while using FSX, a computer entertainment product."  Well, that was stupid of you, wasn't it?

 

vs.

 

"I killed my passenger by doing something in my 172 that I learned to do while using P3D, a professional training product."  Hmm, and the professional training product led you to expect that that was safe...?

 

Scenery isn't totally free of such risk but the risk is much lower - it's the aircraft guys who are really exposed.  So the costs and license arrangements are likely to be more complicated and expensive for professional-quality simulated aircraft.  Orbx and A2A are dealing with very different business realities.

I had to to get the SkyMaster in all of my three sims...  I bought each Carenado version for FSX, FS9, and XPX.  Yessir...

 

The thing is, the FS9, FSX and X-Plane versions all have differences. The X-Plane versions in particular are updated to a great degree, especially older models like the C152 and the C172, so that justifies the fact you've got to buy it again (a lot of work was also put into making those models compliant with both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of X-Plane 10).

Are they really going to check which license you bought for P3D? And punish you if you bought the higher priced one by making you pay more for the add-on? If there is no difference in their add-on product, that is not nice at all.

Glad they are coming out with a native installer then it seems, as I only have P3Dv2.

I am not porting anything. Trying to stay pure with this, as I think all the modding and adding to FSX over the years is what gave me most issues.

 

I second that. I use to run after temporary tweaks in FSX, but in the end I spent an awful amount off time fiddling around instead of flying. Recently moved from FSX to P3D and now enjoy a sim that works rock solid. I don't mind spending a little more to get a functiional product with support and keep my sim "clean". I much rather give the code and tweaks and headaches to the code pros.

 

A2A's models are very realistic and well-suited for P3D license philosophy.

Yes, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.  Liability risk is much greater (and therefore potentially costlier) when you make simulated aircraft, as opposed to scenery.

 

"I killed my passenger by doing something in my 172 that I learned to do while using FSX, a computer entertainment product."  Well, that was stupid of you, wasn't it?

 

vs.

 

"I killed my passenger by doing something in my 172 that I learned to do while using P3D, a professional training product."  Hmm, and the professional training product led you to expect that that was safe...?

 

Scenery isn't totally free of such risk but the risk is much lower - it's the aircraft guys who are really exposed.  So the costs and license arrangements are likely to be more complicated and expensive for professional-quality simulated aircraft.  Orbx and A2A are dealing with very different business realities.

 

This is very true, one of the big reasons real world aviation is so expensive is liability costs.   As soon as you 'label' something as 'official' or 'professional' and affiliate your company with aviation organizations connected to real world flight training, the potential for lawsuits goes waaaay up.  The increased liability costs factor in to the end user's license fee who uses a program like P3D in a professional sense.  

 

Cheers

TJ

Are they really going to check which license you bought for P3D? And punish you if you bought the higher priced one by making you pay more for the add-on? If there is no difference in their add-on product, that is not nice at all.

I feel the same way and posted the following on A2A's forum, but this has not yet been answered:

 

"And why is A2A charging 60% more to owners of the Professional version of P3D2, than what the owners of the Academic version have to pay? Nothing has been posted that indicates that there is any difference between the two versions of the C-172 (or between them and the FSX version). As far as I know, no other 3rd party developer has done this yet, and being first is likely to do even greater PR damage to A2A (which is why I wrote in my original post that this was a really, really BAD idea). And how would you even enforce this? (My guess is that this is mostly just another attempt to shore up the legalese, in which case there are likely no enforcement plans.) LM's licencing for P3D is problematic enough without 3rd party developers adding yet more layers to it . . . to 'ensure' that we are all following the 'rules.' I love flightsimming and my chosen platform is P3D2, but I hate all this 'training' (non-entertainment use) restrictions, with all its cryptic legal language (and I have a degree in Legal Studies)."

Doesn't the profession version have multiple copies? Therefore multiple installs available? Seems legit to me.

 

 

What "VC raindrops?" Prepar3Dv2.2 SDK does not support that at this time. In fact, the entire legacy "chained animation" code has been stripped from v2.2...

 

I think LM are suggesting Aircraft developers do the VC raindrops ... similar to how current wiper animations are done on some AC ... seems like a logical place to put the raindrop animations (in the hands of the AC developer).  For example raindrops hitting a C172 at 120 kts will look very different than raindrops hitting an F16 at 600 kts ... speed and window shapes.

 

Back to A2A, any word on when these new licenses will be available?  I'll happily upgrade as the A2A C-172 IS helping me with real world flight school ... in fact, I'd dare say it's better than my schools motion simulators ... my instructor was very impressed on how quickly I was familiar with the C-172R they use for real world flight training.  The only difference between the A2A C-172R and my school one is the A2A seems much more roomy ... the real C-172R feels exactly like squishing two people into my Lotus ... bring deodorant and rub shoulders  :lol:

 

Cheers, Rob.

Back to A2A, any word on when these new licenses will be available?

From A2A's forum, A2A Licensing with FSX and P3D

As we are nearing the release of our next product, the Accu-Sim Piper Cherokee 180 and the next global Accu-Sim Core Update v.2.0, we wanted to take this opportunity to let our customers know how we will be proceeding with licensing for both Microsoft Flight Simulator X and Lockheed Martin’s Prepar3D in 2014.

 

. . .

 

So in the coming days, we will be releasing native installers for both Microsoft Flight Simulator X and Lockheed Martin’s Prepar3Dv2 for our up and coming Piper Cherokee 180 and our existing C172 Trainer (we’re still discussing options for our entire library).

The new Accu-Sim Piper Cherokee 180 is due out this month.

Sorry jumped the question gun a little ... saw that "days" ... most excellent.

 

Cheers, Rob.

 

 

Doesn't the profession version have multiple copies?

 

Yes, and the code path is not identical.  Not sure if A2A are aware of this, you do actually get a few more things in the Professional version of LM's P3D.

I am not a lawyer or legal expert, but I understand the P3D legal terms well enough  Are you a commercial/military rated pilot and fly for hire or employment?  Then you are a professional, and should use the 'professional' P3D license and affiliated professional addon licenses.  Are you a flight school or training institution?  Same thing, use the appropriate license

 

If you are not one of the above categories, then the academic license suffices whether you hold a student, private, or no pilot certificate.  You can call yourself a 'student' even if you don't have a student pilot's certificate nor are taking any kind of ground school.  This leeway lets you 'use' P3D for 'fun' since there is no reason learning something can't be fun.  MS is still technically the 'entertainment' side of this FSX/P3D platform, thus not held to flight training standards or liability.

 

I don't like all this legal language either, but I understand why it is there.  We live in a lawsuit happy world and companies can and should protect themselves.  Once you start affiliating yourself beyond the 'hobby' of flight simulating and go into real world aviation and training, you expose yourself to the beast of potential lawsuits and litigation.  Since A2A can't afford an army of lawyers to defend themselves, they do what they have to align themselves legally.

 

It isn't ideal for us simmers who mostly use flight simming as an entertaining hobby, but thats the way it is.

 

Cheers

TJ

As I thought then.

A quick argument about a topic not understood by the people against it.

Yes, but it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.  Liability risk is much greater (and therefore potentially costlier) when you make simulated aircraft, as opposed to scenery.

 

"I killed my passenger by doing something in my 172 that I learned to do while using FSX, a computer entertainment product."  Well, that was stupid of you, wasn't it?

 

vs.

 

"I killed my passenger by doing something in my 172 that I learned to do while using P3D, a professional training product."  Hmm, and the professional training product led you to expect that that was safe...?

 

Scenery isn't totally free of such risk but the risk is much lower - it's the aircraft guys who are really exposed.  So the costs and license arrangements are likely to be more complicated and expensive for professional-quality simulated aircraft.  Orbx and A2A are dealing with very different business realities.

^

This guy gets it!