Boeing 707 :wub:

 

Glen Hall

777-200ER variants are very likely, as well as an updated NGX with scimitar winglets. A DC-6 FSX/P3D port should also be in the works.

 

My guess for the next new aircraft? ATR-72.

 

Why? It's the best-selling regional aircraft in the world, and unlike the 757/767 it will continue to sell well into the future. Majestic already has proven with their Q400 that a good turboprop will sell well, and the old Flight1 ATR-72 is seriously showing its age. PMDG has experience with the Jetstream 41 so they'll know how to make a turboprop.

 

 

Alternative projects - maybe a cooperative project with FSLabs to cover the whole Airbus range, like the A380/A350. FSLabs start from the small A32X while PMDG starts from the Superjumbos. If PMDG wants to do another classic aircraft then the 747 Classic would be a great project.

 

Or maybe a stab into the future? The Bombardier CS100. It would make great commercial sense to make an airliner that has the potential to be a bestseller, rivaling the 737NG/A32X.

 

This post contains my honest and unbiased opinions.

With PMDG's current standpoint, they are very close to Boeing. (I believe they even share information with PMDG - thats something I've yet to see be done with other simulator companies) Have you noticed that they have only produced Boeing aircraft? (I'm including Douglas/McDonnel Douglas as boeing in this example - I know its a disservice to say that to what was once the King of commercial aircraft but thats what I'm doing here.). Firstly, Is there a lot of demand for a ATR 42/72 in the flightsim community at the moment?  From what I can see, no there isn't currently and we have the Flight1 ATR (it is old but it works...) and isn't there another one that is in the works?  I'm also sure that PMDG don't want a repeat of the MD-11 sales wise because making planes that the dev wants to make when there isn't a lot of interest in the community is a recipe for disaster...

 

I also highly doubt that PMDG will ever make an Airbus, let alone Co-operate with another company to make one (especially when FSLabs are as talented as they are on their own! ) as all of their experience is with Boeing and MDD - the differences between simulating a Boeing and airbus is immense - almost everything is worlds apart.

 

I also think that the CS100/300 won't happen again, because PMDG and Boeing are pretty close together and the logic and differences in systems is pretty large.

 

Honestly, I think that PMDG's best bet right now would be the 757/767.  I know they have said that this isn't going to happen but I think (but I don't run a company so I don't know about what they believe they should make.

The 757/767 have a fair bit in common and although this is minor, the 764 has almost identical displays to that of the Triple. (Or as I refer to the 764, the Frankensteined 767 ) As a bonus, there ***seems*** to be high demand for these birds even though there are some developers who are supposedly making both of these but I don't know whether they will be released in this century or the next one!

With PMDG's current standpoint, they are very close to Boeing. (I believe they even share information with PMDG - thats something I've yet to see be done with other simulator companies) Have you noticed that they have only produced Boeing aircraft?

 

The Jetstream is from British Aerospace, and the very old B1900D is from Beechcraft. But I agree with you that PMDG is close to Boeing. 

 

Firstly, Is there a lot of demand for a ATR 42/72 in the flightsim community at the moment?  From what I can see, no there isn't

 

The same can be said for the Q400, I mean who wanted a Q400 until Majestic came up with theirs? From a development standpoint the ATR72-500 is actually pretty simple compared to the Q400. It has a very basic FMS similar to the Jetstream 41, and that means less work. The -600 is different however.

 

I also highly doubt that PMDG will ever make an Airbus, let alone Co-operate with another company to make one (especially when FSLabs are as talented as they are on their own!   ) as all of their experience is with Boeing and MDD - the differences between simulating a Boeing and airbus is immense - almost everything is worlds apart.

 

FSLabs' Lefteris is ex-PMDG. Grouping together is IMO a wise commercial decision as FSLabs will probably take many years to complete the A32X series and the A330, let alone the A350/A380. However they have developed the most complex FBW flight model in FS and it would be a shame if it wasn't taken advantage of in order to maximize sales - before Lockheed change their P3D platform to the point where it becomes a whole new simulator. This is why I think it's great commercially to group together and maximize the revenue potential of a complex Airbus, with FSLabs moving up from the A32X and PMDG moving down from the A380.

 

I also think that the CS100/300 won't happen again, because PMDG and Boeing are pretty close together and the logic and differences in systems is pretty large.

 

Well someone's going to do it, and they'll probably make a lot of money from the CS100.

 

Honestly, I think that PMDG's best bet right now would be the 757/767.

 

Maybe, the 757/767 are airliners currently at the twilight of their careers and given PMDG's knack for spending years in developing their products, by the time we see a PMDG 757/767 most of the real ones would probably have ended up in the desert already. The 747-400 is special in many people's minds so there's a commercial justification, but the 757/767? not so much. Also most people here don't realize that there's already a great 757/767 available - The FlightFactor 757/767 for X-Plane. Finally the Level-D 767, while showing its age, still works quite well and can even be ported to P3D. The Flight1 ATR? Not so much, with FS9 models and panels that frequently cause CTDs.

 

 

Now PMDG could do a 787, but that would mean direct competition with Qualitywings.

How is the jetstream update coming along? Will it ever happen now it's been relegated to the legacy section of the forum.

Long live the JS4100, she's a bird and a half.

The Jetstream is from British Aerospace, and the very old B1900D is from Beechcraft.

My Apologies for being so ignorant about the two props! :\ - I completely forgot about them. But, bear in mind that RSR flew the Jetstream.

 

The same can be said for the Q400, I mean who wanted a Q400 until Majestic came up with theirs? From a development standpoint the ATR72-500 is actually pretty simple compared to the Q400. It has a very basic FMS similar to the Jetstream 41, and that means less work. The -600 is different however.

Very True.  I'm pretty sure that most of the flight sim community didn't give a toss about the Q400 until Majestic brought out theirs, and then everybody got it!  And you're right about the -500 being a simpler aircraft than the Q400 in regards to it having less LCD screens and being more "basic" than its rival.  But having a similar FMS doesn't necessarily mean that it is easier to make the entire aircraft...

 

FSLabs' Lefteris is ex-PMDG. Grouping together is IMO a wise commercial decision as FSLabs will probably take many years to complete the A32X series and the A330, let alone the A350/A380. However they have developed the most complex FBW flight model in FS and it would be a shame if it wasn't taken advantage of in order to maximize sales - before Lockheed change their P3D platform to the point where it becomes a whole new simulator. This is why I think it's great commercially to group together and maximize the revenue potential of a complex Airbus, with FSLabs moving up from the A32X and PMDG moving down from the A380.

 

 

 

FSLabs did mention that an A380 (this also applies to the even more advanced A350) was out of the question due to it being so "different" to the a32X/A33X/A34X, have you been in the flight deck of the a350 or a380 - they are massively different to their older counterparts - FSLabs even questioned whether it was possible to make an aircraft in P3D's limitations with all of the screens and massive amount more complexity!   They also said that the two hardest parts to produce of the A320X was the FBW and MCDU because they are not well documented...  Now imagine having to make changes to that FBW code and completely re-doing the MCDU! A dev's nightmare!  They also said that now they have the A320 completed, they will be able to make the A319 and A321 (no promises on the A318 sadly...) with minimal changes since they all share systems that are "plug and play" meaning that they can all simply move systems around from one of the busses to another with minimal effort - just as maintenance do in real life!  I'm assuming that the A33X and A34X will, while being an immense challenge, take much less time than the 6 years for the a32X, because the basic parts of the aircraft can be shared so easily!  It may be a wise decision for two flightsim companies to combine their skills but I just can't see it happening anytime soon. 

 

 

Well someone's going to do it, and they'll probably make a lot of money from the CS100.

 

True, but we can never gauge the response to a new aircraft that is released into the sim world, it might be wildly successful and be the next 737 NGX or it might be that plane that just sits on your hard drive and is never loaded...

 

Maybe, the 757/767 are airliners currently at the twilight of their careers and given PMDG's knack for spending years in developing their products, by the time we see a PMDG 757/767 most of the real ones would probably have ended up in the desert already. The 747-400 is special in many people's minds so there's a commercial justification, but the 757/767? not so much. Also most people here don't realize that there's already a great 757/767 available - The FlightFactor 757/767 for X-Plane. Finally the Level-D 767, while showing its age, still works quite well and can even be ported to P3D. The Flight1 ATR? Not so much, with FS9 models and panels that frequently cause CTDs.

Twilight?  Absolutely not!  The 767 is still rolling off the production line and the 757 is going to be around for a while - its performance is unmatched in its class!  I think there is a lot of demand for a 757/767 and I know that many people hold them dearly in their hearts but the 747 is special by anyones opinion.  I have the FF 757/767 but I dont touch them...  I know it sounds weird but they feel lacking and don't have that sense of this has been finished and nothing has been skimped on that I've come to love from developers such as Majestic, PMDG and FSLabs.  I don't have the ATR but, if its really bad, then I feel for those who have it and don't like using it because of its datedness...  

Now PMDG could do a 787, but that would mean direct competition with Qualitywings.

 

I'd be getting the PMDG one if they made it! 

 

It took 2 posts because I had too many quotes?!?

 

My bet is on a antique prop aircraft.

 

Given the easter eggs hidden in the 747  :smile:

But having a similar FMS doesn't necessarily mean that it is easier to make the entire aircraft...

 

Actually it is. Much of the development work (and bug fixing) tends to go to complex FMS calculations and autopilot modes. The ATR72-500 does not have a complex FMS or autopilot. It doesn't even have an autothrottle or FADEC - the throttles are fully manual. Turboprop beta range simulation would be the biggest challenge but since PMDG already did it with the Jetstream 41 it's not a major problem. Of course PMDG could go overboard and simulate circuit breakers but (IIRC) no one is that interested in pulling circuit breakers. PMDG did the DC-6 as a side project not because the systems are easy, but because there are no FMS calculations involved.

 

FSLabs even questioned whether it was possible to make an aircraft in P3D's limitations with all of the screens and massive amount more complexity!

 

P3D could change quite dramatically with v4.x and a possible move to 64-bit. And X-plane is always an option because FlightFactor did their own A350. It's very doable because it's mostly a difference in display format.

 

have you been in the flight deck of the a350 or a380 - they are massively different to their older counterparts

 

They also said that the two hardest parts to produce of the A320X was the FBW and MCDU because they are not well documented

 

Which is why I said FSLabs should stick to older FBW Airbuses while PMDG focuses on newer Airbuses - that way the development efforts don't overlap with 2 dev teams developing the same thing. FSLabs simply do not have the resources to develop the entire Airbus range before their existing FBW platform becomes obsolete. I mean it's a minor miracle that they perfected the FBW Airbus, with proper control laws, alpha protection, autothrust and autotrim. With this foundation developers can now build the entire FBW Airbus range, but FSLabs simply don't have enough resources on their own.

 

 

Now imagine having to make changes to that FBW code and completely re-doing the MCDU! A dev's nightmare

 

I'm assuming that the A33X and A34X will, while being an immense challenge, take much less time than the 6 years for the a32X, because the basic parts of the aircraft can be shared so easily!

 

Well it's better than making another aircraft from scratch....With FSLabs the foundation is already built. The FMGC is not that big of an issue here for developers at the level of PMDG, it's how the information is displayed which is the difference. As for timing, FSLabs isn't just making the A319/A321 and the sharklets, they're also making a Pro version of the A32X, and then move on to the A330. 6 years is entirely possible, meaning 10 years+ for the A350/A380 - By which time P3D will probably become unrecognizable. This is why I think FSLabs should really seek out partners, and license out their technology.

 

Now with regards to the C-Series, people tend to forget that the C-Series is one of the most pre-ordered aircraft in history. IMO there's a strong case for the success of this aircraft and should a quality developer like PMDG stick their name to it I think it will sell well.

 

The 767 is still rolling off the production line and the 757 is going to be around for a while - its performance is unmatched in its class!

 

I don't have the ATR but, if its really bad, then I feel for those who have it and don't like using it because of its datedness...  

 

There is a problem - the current production 767s does not use the same traditional cockpit as the older 767s. There are 4 different cockpit types for the 767 - Traditional, -400, Rockwell Collins retrofit LCD and Rockwell Collins large format LCD, Which will complicate development. The ATR72 has the -500 and the -600, but IMO they're better differentiated if PMDG wants to sell it as an extension for more money, as people are more willing to pay for a new variant than a retrofit cockpit.

 

With the 757/767 you have a lot of options, you got Level-D, FlightFactor, Qualitywings and Captainsim, all of which are somewhat decent products. With the ATR you only got Flight1, which is a FS9 product with FS9 models and their graphical artifacts, plus glitches in the FMS frequently causing CTD. The X-plane ATR is very 'lite' and the Virtualcol ATR is so 'lite' it uses default FSX gauges.

 

I think they will be working on a refresh of the NGX - split scimitar winglets, BBJ, MAX models, etc. All incorporating the latest developments they have modeled in the 747v3.

 

I would love for someone to do a PMDG-quality 757/767, but I have sadly come to accept that this will probably never happen.

I hope, that they will make the 747-8I and 747-8F.

I'd be happy with almost any of the suggestions - while a 737 update would probably be my least favorite of them.

 

For the 757/767, yes I would love to fly one of those or both of them in PMDG quality - maybe also the B777-200(ER). However this would have been a much better choice years ago. Just as in real life, everybody is so keen on the 757 because of its power and its beautiful lines. But development went too slow or too late. So it's a niche product now - and it would be even more after a possible development time. Same thing with the 777: I was quite disappointed they were not doing the -200ER, but only the rare 200LR, as the -200(ER) was the one I got to know first and also still the one you got to see the most at the airports. Now it's been removed from the fleets slowly. I would probably buy any of them (especially the 757) the first day, but I still voted for the 787 because this is the one that has the most potential in future when the next development is over - at least if you're keep your sim world up to date like I do.

... PMDG did the DC-6 as a side project not because the systems are easy, but because there are no FMS calculations involved. ...

 

Now, that's quite a statement. Would be interesting to know where you get your information from? Or is this just pure conjecture and/or speculation?

 

IIRC, PMDG has never stated, that they developed the DC-6, because it has no FMS calculations... 

One of the team, think RR, mentioned some tech from the 747 being rolled into the 777 via the new OC uploading process. So would like to see that soon. Also want to see an update to the NGX. The long ago promised -900ER is sorely missing in the Boeing stable.

I think 772ER first and 767-200 and 300 as options.

I can add to this bla bla bla. If I was pmdg I would re-work NGX which after the release of the Queen looks like "legacy" product. Flight model 1st. Then I would move to 777. Not much to do but again it would be great that they "match" flight model to the Queen.

 

757/767. Would love that one too but, hey, despite many claiming to buy it, not many will do it in reality. Then there is a problem of flight sim itself. Good product takes 2 years to complete. Still flight sim world is not showing which direction it will follow. PMDG can't loose money.

 

787. QW is making one. Will it match pmdg quality? We don't know, but let's pretend that it won't but it will be cheaper. Majority will go for cheaper option.

 

So, bottom line. Updating what they have should be a priority. Maybe making the same for xplane.

This speculation comes up about once a month, but hey I'll play- it's fun to speculate even though no one here knows.

 

My feeling is that the Large Boeing Modern Tubeliner Market is well covered now by PDMG.  Do we need yet another slightly different variant of an aircraft?  777, 737, 747...expertly modeled.....is a 757/767 really going to plug that hole in your life?  Let's see something new from arguably the best flight simulation team out there- I'd like to see them continue to push themselves into new areas.

 

Heck given this team's track record, if they accurately modeled the flight of a spit ball I'd buy it.

 

If I had the money, I'd drive a dump truck full of cash to their headquarters and request an all new Flight Simulator, developed from the ground up, to take us into the next generation.

 

Mark Trainer