Sign in to follow this  
2bsc

Maybe an Airbus?? - He's not really asking for that now, is he?

Recommended Posts

I know this question has been stated before many many many many times. :ph34r:

As far as I know PMDG (others too) used to point out Airbus' unwillingness to cooperate with simulation developers.

But things change - take a look (who hasn't seen it already):

http://www.airbus.com/newsevents/news-events-single/detail/officially-licensed-projecting-airbus-brand-and-image-in-the-computer-simulation-market/

Whoever will get a call from them, it's defintiely a good thing for flight simulation!

Share this post


Link to post
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

This is really is great for the sim world! Hip hip!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Given that PMDG's history has been all Boeing, it is highly unlikely, but who knows.  As you said, this question has come up many times in the past, so I have to ask why you would ask it again?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

If you are as serious about flying an airbus as a lot of us are on here about flying PMDG Boeings, then you had better have a joystick handy. Flying a PMDG level airbus simulation with a wheel would be akin to playing a driving simulation with a nintendo gaming controller. 

Share this post


Link to post

I do not believe this is a good thing for flight simming, because what Airbus if after is not making commercial flight sims better (they have their own, which are sliiiiightly more advanced), but to protect their intellectual property (logos, names, designs). "Offically licensed by Airbus" will mean you have to pay €€€ to Airbus. Not licensing your product with Airbus could potentially mean that you are not allowed to use their name, logo and designs at all, especially when producing payware addons. 

The following is from an article from a month ago that was posted to r/flightsim (no link to original source, but I remember reading it on a news site as well). 

The important quote is: "We expect royalties to total one million euros a year by 2019"

 

 

Mods: Could we move this topic out of the PMDG forum, pls. It's important for all sims and really does not relate to PMDG.

Share this post


Link to post
6 minutes ago, domae001 said:

Mods: Could we move this topic out of the PMDG forum, pls. It's important for all sims and really does not relate to PMDG.

Agreed.

Moving.

Share this post


Link to post

Forgive my lack of enthusiasm about this news.

The metamessage I'm getting from the article is:  "we've found an easy-to-milk cow and we intend to do so without giving much in return. Yes, we will give you our logos and images so you portray our image correctly, after you shell out a nice piece of the cake".

I don't think this is much in favor of giving developers access to more accurate data or technical cooperation (much less certification of any kind), but mostly about trademark enforcement in disguise, so they don't get burned in the process a-la AA (remember the PR issue that arose years ago for wanting to ban repaints with their logo/images?).

This is, of course, my own totally uninformed opinion after reading the article. I hope I'm wrong in the long run. Time will tell.

cheers!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

This "News" can well explain some silence in some Airbus add-on development fronts... I don't really see it as great news for the Game Simulation market, where we all are after all...

Just imagine if Aerofly FS, X-Plane, P3D and FSX developers now have to start paying considerable amount of royalties to be able to create add-ons. This means that add-ons that are more graphical representations of an Airbus model than of the aircraft and systems properly said, are probably going to be wiped from competition, but it also says that serious / interesting / promising products can have their fate dictated if the prospective sales can't support the amount to be paid to Airbus Industries ( ? )

Well, just imagine if Piper, Cessna, Beechcraft / Raytheon, Bell, Agusta, ATR, Embraer ... all like the idea ? 

 

Share this post


Link to post

On the surface it doesn't look like good news. If Airbus is targeting consumer-level flight sims, then they're drastically overestimating the amount of license payments that can be skimmed off before a project is just stopped dead in its tracks. Only those with cash to spare would consider it.

Speaking of which.... there might still be potential for an X-Plane Airbus in the near future. Austin Meyer mentioned in a recent video Q&A that he has a contract pending with a professional flight training customer, to produce an A320 flight control system to "certification standards." He's already started coding it. 

In fact, the current XP11 PlaneMaker has a checkbox in the /Expert/Artificial Stability menu for "Airbus Fly By Wire System," which presumably enables things like bank angle limits, g-load limits, overspeed control logic and so on (although still a work in progress). 

So it looks like some of the hard work in making an Airbus in X-Plane is already being done, from the inside out. Austin mentioned in the video that after getting the A320 FBW model certified for the outside customer, they would probably hire an artist to do the 3D modeling and include it as a default aircraft. And then he said he'd like to do an A380 just because it would be cool to have (typical Austin).

Now, whether any of this pans out or not is anyone's guess. But Laminar has the resources to spend on licensing if they wanted to. An existing FBW system inside the base engine would also make it easier for a 3rd party to develop a payware model. 

I do worry about the impact on helicopters though, because we could use more Airbus/ex-Eurocopter models. These are all small developers (at least on the X-Plane side) with products that sell for just around $35, not the high-dollar amounts an airliner developer can charge. This could put a big damper on future helicopter projects. 
 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Now Airbus gets to have a yearly revenue of €66.58 billion PLUS €1 Million....

52028577afa96f7933000014.jpg?w=400

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post

DTG got a similar  notification from BNSF. Sell any products with our Logo outside of the USA, and you will need to pay. DTG did not pay, so no DLC with a BNSF logo can be sold outside USA. UP did not seem to care.

 

Share this post


Link to post

Trademark law is a such big deal and I'm surprised that the lawyers took this long to find the flight sim industry. It's probably  not about the money but if they let one entity do it then everyone  will do it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, jabloomf1230 said:

Trademark law is a such big deal and I'm surprised that the lawyers took this long to find the flight sim industry. It's probably  not about the money but if they let one entity do it then everyone  will do it.

This has gone on for years in the combat flight sim area. I remember several historical combat flight sims and related war games that have had trouble over the years with using the correct names and model numbers for iconic warplanes. It was mainly the USA companies that survived the war in good shape and then lawyered up, like Lockheed/Martin and Douglas (swallowed up by Boeing). Not so much the Axis aircraft.... I guess many of those companies are no longer around to complain.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, remember the names of the aircraft fleet in good - old Flight Unlimited ?

And more recently the "problems" ED had with Bell after nearing the release of the UH-1H, another DCS developer recently had with the Gazelle ( probably Airbus Industries behind it too... ? )

Anyway, it has to be equal for every one, I believe. I imagine Airlinetools must have paid a fortune in royalties for their A32X, which is a serious flight training tool, and competes these days with games like P3D / FSX / X-Plane and their Airbus addons... It's unfair for Airlinetools...

The same happens with other professional flight simulation companies, I believe...

 

Share this post


Link to post

It is pretty much the same for all games and simulations and etc. If you want to use a registered trademark or product or music in a game, you have to have a license for it
since you making money out of someone else's work/product. This is also why there are no Gulfstream biz jet add-ons. GS have said no to all kinds of simulation add-ons.

Look at the GTA games, they usually have fictional cars which is made up from several real world cars In GTA V they had real Audis though but I think that was
more of a win-win situation for Rockstar/Audi. Rockstar got to use real Audi car models and Audi got exclusive right to product placement / advertising in the game.

That is why I don't understand why people are so negative about it since this is how it works from both a legal and business perspective.



 

Share this post


Link to post

It's not that licensing is bad... it's that licensing is expensive.  Crazy expensive.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

In related news: Jardesign's former A320 is now called the "JD320 Airliner". (All similarities with real aircraft are purely coincidental.)

Share this post


Link to post

Fortunately  this is Airbus  and not Disney. Disney has sued mom and pop operations over mouse toys that look too much like Mickey.

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, domae001 said:

In related news: Jardesign's former A320 is now called the "JD320 Airliner". (All similarities with real aircraft are purely coincidental.)

And so it begins.

Share this post


Link to post
On ‎4‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 2:14 PM, jcomm said:

Well, just imagine if Piper, Cessna, Beechcraft / Raytheon, Bell, Agusta, ATR, Embraer ... all like the idea ? 

There's no need to "imagine" about Cessna. Textron (their parent company) has been scamming - er, I mean licensing - rights to use their name and likeness for many years already.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, domae001 said:

In related news: Jardesign's former A320 is now called the "JD320 Airliner". (All similarities with real aircraft are purely coincidental.)

Not bad, we will have in the future a lot of Sessnas, Droings and Airguses!:blink:

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this