1 hour ago, scandinavian13 said:

I don't recall that changing as much as people reading their own thoughts into prior statements. "We anticipate" does not equal "we will absolutely," as an example.

FSX and P3D being our primary sims, I can't see a logical path that would fit the situation where an observation was made earlier that a platform would not be suitable for one of our products to be moved into, also being applied to out of. There have been no statements that have said the inverse was unlikely, or not possible. Moreover, if you look back at the original shots in the DC-6 preview thread, you may notice that it doesn't quite look like XPL.

Sorry I must've misinterpreted Rob's message here:

 

2 hours ago, ViperXBR said:

Sorry I must've misinterpreted Rob's message here:

No, that one is rather clear.

Your earlier message seemed to imply that we'd committed to bringing things into XPL, but then changed our stance. In reality, I believe all we've ever said in the past is that we anticipate bringing the rest of the fleet into XPL.

Either way, the statement that one product is not likely going into a platform doesn't entirely logically justify the thought that one would be restricted from coming out of that platform.

A square is a kind of rectangle, but a rectangle isn't necessarily a square.

2 hours ago, ViperXBR said:

Sorry I must've misinterpreted Rob's message here:

 

I wouldn't waste you breath here. Like he said, "we anticipate" is worthless information. Discard and move on. It's just "marketing hogwash"; forum noise. Show us something interesting, or tell us something factual.

Interpreting noise will usually lead to misinterpretation.

So the topic is asking for a 727? Did we have an answer for that? Or can we close the thread?

I like the 737 and 727 classics, but about the only thing that we have not had EVER is a good 747SP, now THAT would be something!   We had a very good model systems wise in the RFP, but there were some issues with that one though and we need something that has good modern graphics with the integrated system.  Man, at this stage I would settle for a good freeware SP, if only I could find one...

We can dream though can't we ?

Regards

[deleted]

Off topic in terms of the 727, but I'd like to know at what point organisations like PMDG say "enough is enough" with regards to being sportsmanlike towards QualityWings and their never-ending 787 development. There's enormous demand for this aircraft which I'm sure PMDG could absolutely nail, and QualityWings (as hard as I'm sure they're trying) simply aren't coming up with the goods after several years.

3 minutes ago, bitbucket said:

Off topic in terms of the 727, but I'd like to know at what point organisations like PMDG say "enough is enough" with regards to being sportsmanlike towards QualityWings and their never-ending 787 development. There's enormous demand for this aircraft which I'm sure PMDG could absolutely nail, and QualityWings (as hard as I'm sure they're trying) simply aren't coming up with the goods after several years.

Welcome to the forum. Please note that full names are required to be placed in your posts, per forum rules.

As far as your comment goes, I think it's important to keep in mind that quality takes time. Our 747 took longer than we thought, too, but I think it's better off because of that. If you want something high quality, it's not going to be quick; and if you want something quick, it's not going to be high quality.

It's very clear that they're continuing to work on their project, and it's not like we don't have our hands busy with our other projects.

On 3/5/2017 at 3:43 AM, pracines said:

FS2Crew would have a fun time modeling a first officer and flight engineer.  

 

Ummm, no   We're FS2Crew, not FS3Crew.

Two's company.  Three's a crowd 

3 minutes ago, byork said:

Ummm, no   We're FS2Crew, not FS3Crew.

Two's company.  Three's a crowd 

haha - this comment wins today.

Gold star.

21 minutes ago, scandinavian13 said:

Welcome to the forum. Please note that full names are required to be placed in your posts, per forum rules.

As far as your comment goes, I think it's important to keep in mind that quality takes time. Our 747 took longer than we thought, too, but I think it's better off because of that. If you want something high quality, it's not going to be quick; and if you want something quick, it's not going to be high quality.

It's very clear that they're continuing to work on their project, and it's not like we don't have our hands busy with our other projects.

Another thing to consider is that QualityWings isn't doing this full-time, so going to take longer for them given real-life commitments.

If quality takes time then the Level D 757 is going to be amazing.

hahaha

4 hours ago, jcalder said:

If quality takes time then the Level D 757 is going to be amazing.

Considering the wait would be forever (they dropped the project), what is beyond perfection? 

 

1 hour ago, Budbud said:

Considering the wait would be forever (they dropped the project), what is beyond perfection? 

Did they officially drop the project?  I haven't checked their forums for quite sometime.  Last time I looked there was no announcement that it was officially done.

Well I could swear I read on their forum some years ago that the project was dead. But the only I can find for now after a quick search was posted on November 2016:

http://www.leveldsim.com/forums/b757_topic26376.html?KW=757

"The Level-D 757 is in a permanent state of indolence. 
Nothing to report."

It doesn't exactly mean that the project is dead, but doesn't give much hope for a release anytime soon if ever.

Wooow I'm glad this topic has grown so
Then there are some arguments in favor of 727:
- I never met anyone who did not like it.
- everybody Loves
Powerful
- pretty
- multi use
- all the great companies in the world have used
- has modernized versions with fmc
- in older versions, with INS and on-board engineer, there could be an optional "virtual engineer" for the lazy
- it is true that the young people who are arriving today in the simulation, prefer modern aircraft and simple to fly, but most of the time they usually take "obscure versions of the depths of the internet" and this ends up giving no return
- With proper and well-positioned cameras in the cab, operating it will not be such a difficult one as long as you guarantee simple access to all vital parts of the operation
- a good manual like you usually do, solve all the doubts