Do youall believe one of these scenarios might have been the case with this aircraft?

 

I think you nailed it. I'm supportive of the team and truly believe this project has a ton of potential but since the time of release, I discounted the first couple of issues but now seeing the sheer number that keep rolling in, it's clear this project was far from finished...

I don't have this aircraft...yet.  I am definitely interested in it though.

 

One of my pet peeves with developers, though, are those who utilize the general public as a Secondary beta testing pool without their consent.  Either that or releasing the product before they should have in an effort to bolster waning development funds...again without informing (potential) buyers that the product is essentially unfinished.  Then upon release, promising disappointed customers a "massive" service pack to fix all of the issues that should have been sorted before initial release.

 

Do youall believe one of these scenarios might have been the case with this aircraft?

Hope I can give a little perspective. There are 2 things that developers can do little about. The first is the variety of setups out there. Short of doing a small pre-release to a select number of users like FSLabs did with the A320, a dev cannot locate all the problems that can be found that are due to local computer configurations. And if a problem isn't discovered, it cannot be solved. This sort of thing is something that every dev, from PMDG to FSLabs to Carenado runs into.

 

Second, developers and testers do try to operate the aircraft in the way that they expect it will be operated by the users. But again, we easily end up operating the aircraft in a certain way that doesn't bring to light the problems in the system. One can fly thousands of perfect flights for months in the aircraft without ever seeing an issue but then on release day hoards of complaints arise because every person is different in the way they approach things. And once again, if a problem is not discovered, it cannot be solved. It is not always intentional that the public become beta testers but it inevitably appears to be that way because neither the developers, nor the testers can work out ways to bring to light every single problem.

Hope I can give a little perspective. There are 2 things that developers can do little about. The first is the variety of setups out there. Short of doing a small pre-release to a select number of users like FSLabs did with the A320, a dev cannot locate all the problems that can be found that are due to local computer configurations. And if a problem isn't discovered, it cannot be solved. This sort of thing is something that every dev, from PMDG to FSLabs to Carenado runs into.

 

Second, developers and testers do try to operate the aircraft in the way that they expect it will be operated by the users. But again, we easily end up operating the aircraft in a certain way that doesn't bring to light the problems in the system. One can fly thousands of perfect flights for months in the aircraft without ever seeing an issue but then on release day hoards of complaints arise because every person is different in the way they approach things. And once again, if a problem is not discovered, it cannot be solved. It is not always intentional that the public become beta testers but it inevitably appears to be that way because neither the developers, nor the testers can work out ways to bring to light every single problem.

I completely understand that.  I worked extensively on the iFly 737NG project, so I have a good idea about the general 'bugs' that you are talking about.  But I am not talking about random issues that would arise due to operator error, incorrect installation procedures, or different system setups.  I am talking about glaring flaws and/or issues that are present for everybody and is not true to the aircraft the software is simulating...such as the throttle spike issue that people keep speaking about.  The biggest 2 examples of this problem would be AirSimmer and Ariane, but I have seen it time and again on a lesser scale with other developers.  Wilco, CaptainSim, and QualityWings with their 757 (They did much better on their further releases) would be good examples.

 

Anyways, I'm not trying to derail the thread...just a passing thought through my ADHD brain.  Now what was I doing?  

Still excited for this one, and bought it day one with good initial results.  I am happy to see the very pro active support TFDi is offering to the community.  But, having said all that, I do feel this was rushed just to get out the door this year unfortunately.  I have no doubt it will be an awesome bird, but just not yet.

 

I upgraded video cards this week as a Christmas gift to myself and the results have been great other than with the 717.  I went from an AMD 390X to a Nvidia 1070.  It's been a nice bump in performance, and enjoying it with everything else, but now for whatever reason the 717 crashes my entire machine after a few minutes.  Seems others are having similar issues, and it's on their fix it list, but still, dissappointing as I'd really like to actually fly it again.

 

I'll be patient as they are a new developer and what I have flown has been fun, but with the missing features and now the bugs, it really should have been offered as an "early access" type product.

This may have been stated elsewhere, but for anyone who found a drop in FPS after the last update, try setting the 'Allow Hardware Rendering' flag to 'checked'  (available in the Addon-Manager - Customize - Options). I believe this will shift some of the VC glass processing from your CPU to your GPU (which was apparently how it was set before the last update by default).

 

I have not seen such a feature before in an add-on but I did a bit of testing and this thing really works. With P3D V3.4, I offloaded 19% of my total CPU utilization to my GPU (which added 10% to the GPU utilization). My system has a more powerful GPU and the effect of this shift is very noticeable in terms of sim performance. YMMV since it's very much dependent on your hardware and your settings, but having the power to move these loads around is impressive!

for a dev's first plane, I think its outstanding. Great customer support too. I think with a few tweaks, there will be real winner here. 

 

 

The biggest 2 examples of this problem would be AirSimmer and Ariane,

 

Never  i would  have  thought  ariane   would  be  come  up  again  thought  it  was  dead  and  buried,  must be  one  of  the worst addon  and  for  any help required  you  needed  a  secret  password  to get  on  their  forum  any  back on track  again 

 

At  least  the dev  is  pushing  out  the fixes   as  they get  fixed  which is  a good  sign

I've been flying this 717 a lot lately and find it to be an excellent experience.

It takes off beautifully, follows speed and altitude restrictions set in the FMC and can do a perfect auto landing, even though I rarely use full auto land.

This 717 hand flies beautifully.

The sounds are great and so is the visual model.  The price was a real deal to have for all three simulations and I love the way it updates on its own.

Other than some very minor things that need fixed, and some added functionality, TFDi is right on track with an awesome simulation of an aircraft that I really longed for.

I've been flying this 717 a lot lately and find it to be an excellent experience.

It takes off beautifully, follows speed and altitude restrictions set in the FMC and can do a perfect auto landing, even though I rarely use full auto land.

This 717 hand flies beautifully.

The sounds are great and so is the visual model. The price was a real deal to have for all three simulations and I love the way it updates on its own.

Other than some very minor things that need fixed, and some added functionality, TFDi is right on track with an awesome simulation of an aircraft that I really longed for.

With all due respect, how can you have a near perfect experience when almost everyone else hase experienced glaring issues with the CDU and speed calculations (in the thousands range), autothrottles and speeds on final approach and other issues in line with the previously mentioned ones?

 

Im honestly not trying to be rude but either your expectations are extremely extremely low, or youre actually that naive.

 

 

With all due respect, how can you have a near perfect experience when almost everyone else hase experienced glaring issues with the CDU and speed calculations (in the thousands range), autothrottles and speeds on final approach and other issues in line with the previously mentioned ones?

 

 

got  it  from  day  one  and  have little  issues  with it,  the cdu  issues  nothing  compared  to pmdg  standard  but  i  works fine, updates  to come  to add  the missing  options, speed  calculation  news  to me got no issues  with  that.  the only  issues  that i have  got   is  the vc  lighting    and  ils  captures   but  thats  going  to be  fixed

got  it  from  day  one  and  have little  issues  with it,  the cdu  issues  nothing  compared  to pmdg  standard  but  i  works fine, updates  to come  to add  the missing  options, speed  calculation  news  to me got no issues  with  that.  the only  issues  that i have  got   is  the vc  lighting    and  ils  captures   but  thats  going  to be  fixed

take a look at their forums. People are reporting that the FMS is calculating speeds in the 1000-2000 knot range for cruise speeds which is apparently causing autothrottle issues.

http://forums.tfdidesign.com/index.php?/topic/482-now-this-is-what-call-support/

 

I'll trade any launch issues for this kind of support. For now, my plane flies like a charm and for any having issues, you should look at that thread. 

 

 

take a look at their forums. People are reporting that the FMS is calculating speeds in the 1000-2000 knot range for cruise speeds which is apparently causing autothrottle issues.

\\i

 

On my pc   havnt  noticed  that at all,  hows  it  on your  pc

 

 

Either that or releasing the product before they should have in an effort to bolster waning development funds...again without informing (potential) buyers that the product is essentially unfinished.

 

This  was  posted  before the  release  date   so everyone  knew  that it  wasnt  completely  finsihed

 

 

The release for us isn’t the end of the journey. It is a start, in a way. We believe the product we’re going to release will be thorough and enjoyable. That said, like any other product, especially the first release, it will not be perfect. We have developed technology to deliver updates that are smaller, quicker, and easier than they are for any comparable product. There are many things we intend to expand and improve in time. These updates will be provided frequently and free of charge to all customers, naturally, potentially excluding something like support for a new simulator platform or an entirely new expansion to the product."

For me there is a big difference between "not perfect" and "not finished"...

 

lot of potential but i'll wait before give my money.