[Next Project] maybe a 727? please?

[G7USL 117]

MD11 for P3D and X-Plane.

 

[Meekg 86]

What I would love to see:

747 classic, MD11v2, A380

What I think would sell:

787, A330, A380, A350 (sorry Boeing, you are outnumbered).

 

Mike

[JumboJet 11]

I'm ready to buy a 747 CL I love the 747 it's my favorite, I'd like a 757/767, but not an another 737... You can't make a new version of your aircraft forever ^^
 

[G7USL 117]

Awesome future simulation

[B747tebs 80]

I think if the QW787 is really good, the next big thing wont be a 787. The next logical thing will be a 757 or 767. Why?

- PMDG never made an Airbus and i think this wont change anytime soon (from a business perspective, it wouldnt make much sense at the moment)
- 717 doesnt have a big market and there is the TFDI which is not bad
- 727 would love to see that one, unfortunately it requires a skilled pilot and most of the pilots today know how to handle an FMC but nothing complex (of course you can have the 727 with FMC, but still)
- 737-100/200 same as for the 727
- 737-300 to 500 could be, but i dont have the feelings its going to be this one (also QW is doing one)
- 747-100/200 same as 727
- 757 or 767 like i said would be logical. Lots of them flying around, there is no good one for P3D. Only the Level-D works with FSX somehow i heard, but thats old...
- 787 is wip by QW
 

[hellmike 5]

I think the 767 is a good alternative, because LVL-D has an overhead that looks like paper pasted in a box, just 2 or 3 videos on youtube for me to give up any possibility of purchase, if pmdg made a 767, I would buy for sure, but I still prefer a 727

[Ted Striker 338]

PMDG said that they are working on a third 4 engine plane besides the 747 and DC-6. Assuming it is a jet, my hopes are on the 707, the beautiful VC-10 above, or the 727.....if you include the APU. I' m not picky or demanding....the announcement of either one would excite me.

Regarding the comment above that it will need an FMC, the DC-6 doesn't have one. I've got enough great FMC planes. I would like something different. A simulated ornery crew to help with the tasks would be fun.

Ted Striker

[G7USL 117]

On 06/03/2017 at 6:50 AM, Tabs said:

 

 Like it or not, the market wants highly automated and popular-in-the-real-world medium to long range jets over and over - we wish it wasn't that way, but it is!

I would hardly place the DC-6 in that category.

[B747tebs 80]

Just now, G7USL said:

I would hardly place the DC-6 in that category.

the DC-6 was only a test-bed for x-plane

[G7USL 117]

3 minutes ago, A32X tebs said:

the DC-6 was only a test-bed for x-plane

Only questioning 'Tabs' reply. The DC-6 does not use an FMC.

 

[scandinavian13 5,192]

2 hours ago, G7USL said:

Only questioning 'Tabs' reply. The DC-6 does not use an FMC.

You're ignoring Tebin's point, which falls in line with Ryan's message.

1. The market wants highly automated and popular-in-the-real-world medium to long range jets over and over
2. The DC-6 was only a test-bed for X-Plane [Additional comment provided by me: this would be to say "market wants" were not a consideration for the DC-6]

The oddity here, however, is the fact that I've explained this a number of times to you, in direct responses to your posts about the MD-11 over the years. Surely you haven't forgotten.

Just in case you have:
The DC-6 wasn't created because we thought that the market wanted it. The DC-6 was created so that we could learn about a new platform and the requirements of developing for it without all of the complexities of a highly-automated aircraft stacked on top of trying to just get a workable solution in a simulator. The development decision was made regardless of market demand for a specific (aforementioned) purpose. Naturally, a company can't do this in perpetuity if they desire to remain afloat. Ergo, use of the DC-6 as justification for your arguments is a poor choice. It always has been, as I've reminded you on quite a few occasions.

[teopereira 25]

10 hours ago, A32X tebs said:

I think if the QW787 is really good, the next big thing wont be a 787. The next logical thing will be a 757 or 767. Why?

- PMDG never made an Airbus and i think this wont change anytime soon (from a business perspective, it wouldnt make much sense at the moment)
- 717 doesnt have a big market and there is the TFDI which is not bad
- 727 would love to see that one, unfortunately it requires a skilled pilot and most of the pilots today know how to handle an FMC but nothing complex (of course you can have the 727 with FMC, but still)
- 737-100/200 same as for the 727
- 737-300 to 500 could be, but i dont have the feelings its going to be this one (also QW is doing one)
- 747-100/200 same as 727
- 757 or 767 like i said would be logical. Lots of them flying around, there is no good one for P3D. Only the Level-D works with FSX somehow i heard, but thats old...
- 787 is wip by QW
 

You can create an option of a "virtual flight engeneer", like A2A did with their L-049 Constellation... Btw, the 737-200 is the 737NG's grandfather and simpler to operate than a 727... Well, we all know it won't happen, but anyway.,... I agree with you that the next logical PMDG project will be a 757 or a 767...

[Wanthuyr Filho 83]

If it would be the case, I'd rather prefer the "modernized" 767-400 with all those new DUs and stuff. That would be quite enjoyable IMO.

[Fabo 213]

8 hours ago, teopereira said:

You can create an option of a "virtual flight engeneer", like A2A did with their L-049 Constellation...

Or like PMDG did with their DC-6, after all.

 

5 hours ago, PhugoidEffect said:

I'd rather prefer the "modernized" 767-400 with all those new DUs and stuff.

That could be it; given my (admitedly limited) understanding, the 764 is fairly close to a 777 flight deck slapped onto a 767 airframe.

[kevinh 409]

7 hours ago, PhugoidEffect said:

If it would be the case, I'd rather prefer the "modernized" 767-400 with all those new DUs and stuff. That would be quite enjoyable IMO.

That would be the ultimate niche product in a niche market. Only two airlines bought the 764, so appeal would be very limited. Even CS didn't offer that version on their 767. If PMDG made a 767 and offered a 764 expansion that might work.