Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
OAL809

Guess the secret project at FlightSimExpo (Poll)

Guess the secret project  

251 members have voted

This poll is closed to new votes
  1. 1. Guess the secret project

    • Dynamic Environmental engine(external flight dynamics,icing accum affecting perf,realistic turb sim etc)
      34
    • 787 or 737 MAX or both
      67
    • Something new in the 747-8 technology (ex completely 747 sim -circuit breakers etc)
      6
    • One of the following airbuses A330 or A340 or A350 or A380
      27
    • Full motion flight sim center running pmdg soft
      25
    • New flightsim platform built from scratch by PMDG
      53
    • Xplane conversion all products
      15
    • Crash simulation engine inside p3d (fires,debris etc)
      11
    • Bombardier Cseries or Embraer Ejets
      16
    • Instructor Station (manage failures etc)
      10
    • 767 remake or collab with level d 757
      32
    • CPDLC implementation with new Swift vatsim client
      21
    • Other
      45

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 06/05/2018 at 03:57 PM

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, rsrandazzo said:

John,

In some other threads there has been some speculation along those lines and I have stated that nobody in those threads had guessed correctly yet...

I always sort of laugh at the mysticism of complexity that people assign to Airbus products.  They aren't any more complicated than their competing products at Boeing.  Back in 1988, sure- FBW and digital systems were new and mysterious back then, but since 1995 there is practically no daylight between the two company's offerings in terms of "complexity" and anyone who tries to say there is hasn't a freaking clue what he is talking about.  (or she... don't want to discriminate in my put-down of stupid comments... sorry.  LOL)

This community has largely made that up as the result of ingesting "marketing."  Don't fall for it. 

Oh- and some alleged agreement between PMDG and Level D Simulations... that is another one that the marketplace made up that has no bearing in truth.

And, "<insert name> owns the MD-11 code" or "<insert name> left the MD-11 team."  Those are self-aggrandizements that also have no shred of truth in them...

But back to our original discussion...  Nope.  😎

Well colour me surprised, I expected you'd go big Airbus - unless you've gone 330 or 350, in which case, awesome.

 

Could you confirm or deny whether or not your "yes" was to the option of "other"? :ph34r:


Karl Brooker

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, squerble said:

Could you confirm or deny whether or not your "yes" was to the option of "other"? :ph34r:

It might be it might not 🙂

Only couple of days left now 🙂

  • Like 2

Chris Makris

PLEASE NOTE PMDG HAS DEPARTED AVSIM

You can find us at http://forum.pmdg.com

 

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, Olympic260 said:

It might be it might not 🙂

Only couple of days left now 🙂

And do you know the earache I'm going to get from my better half when I'm glued to my phone from midnight for an hour at a wedding party??


Karl Brooker

Share this post


Link to post

😁3 days and counting I have not voted in this I put my idea in the other thread but someone may have it right based on the fact they have suggested every thing under sun.     

Edited by rjfry

i9 10900K\ASUS APEX MB \ MSI RTX 2080Ti GAMINGX TRIO \ M.2  Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB C Drive \ 2+1TB Samsung 850 EVO \ 2TB BarraCuba \ 32GB G.SKILL Z DDR4 3600MHZ \ Windows 10 Home\ ASUS 28" 4K monitor\ 4TB Portable Drive\P3DV5

Raymond Fry.

PMDG_Banner_747_Enthusiast.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, Bills511 said:

As Robert S. Randazzo stated in his OP "it is going to be unlike anything PMDG has ever done before, and we think it will be unlike anything you have ever seen at an event related to simming." This means no aircraft as I see it.

What could it be? Saturday can't get here soon enough.

If thats the case then could it be that simulator they have been talking about for several years? You know that full motion one...

I am excited to see what the announcement is, but I hope it is something we all can enjoy from the comfort of our own home.


 

 

                                                                                                                                                        

Share this post


Link to post
40 minutes ago, shamrockflyer said:

If thats the case then could it be that simulator they have been talking about for several years? You know that full motion one...

Full size, not full motion.

...and we announced that at a previous conference, so it's definitely not that.


Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, scandinavian13 said:

The way it was written seemed to imply that devs need to acquire the rights from other devs to do a similar project, instead of buying the assets/IP, which is more of what you're getting at.

Either way, I wasn't trying to derail the topic.

 

Also: Please sign your post in accordance with the forum rules.

I never tried to imply that. If you see a good development team, far along with a 737 classic or 757, and then they stop it, why not buy the rights and bring them on to finish? That was my theory. Sorry I thought the post signing was for support requests.  - David Lee

Edited by Boeing or not going

Share this post


Link to post
14 hours ago, rsrandazzo said:

 

In some other threads there has been some speculation along those lines and I have stated that nobody in those threads had guessed correctly yet...

But back to our original discussion...  Nope.  😎

For the benefit of everyone, I went back through a few threads and made a short list of things it apparently isn't:

Hardware
New sim
PSX-style aircraft (platform agnostic, just inject to sim)
MD11
A350/A380
787
Old aircraft - B377 etc
Multicrew
757/767
Xplane conversions
CPDLC
Antonov


Karl Brooker

Share this post


Link to post

i forgot to add shared cockpit functionality.Anyway another good idea would be a "live piloting" with logbook ,maintenance status etc.What i mean.
Imagine an application that you and many people around the world want to fly the same aircraft as you have in your sim.

 

 Mike flies the 747 from YSSY to KSFO.Lands and park at the gate A12 at KSFO.Hours ago he had talked with Jason to pick up the aircraft from that gate and fly back to YSSY as happens in reality.Jason will pick up the aircraft as Mike had left even with all switches at the same position.If Mike had a hard landing or he had forgotten weather radar on Jason will have to check the logbook first to see in what situation the aicraft is and of course turn off the weather radar OFF  :P Finally Jason he could not fly or his flight would have been delayed due to maintenance etc and of course when Jason will have arrived at YSSY again another person will fly the same registered aircraft and must check the log if everything is ok and so on..
 


Mihalis Vele

 

A3xx series

Boeing 737/747-400/757/767/777

Share this post


Link to post
30 minutes ago, squerble said:

For the benefit of everyone, I went back through a few threads and made a short list of things it apparently isn't:

Hardware
New sim
PSX-style aircraft (platform agnostic, just inject to sim)
MD11
A350/A380
787
Old aircraft - B377 etc
Multicrew
757/767
Xplane conversions
CPDLC
Antonov

I am pretty sure its a 1995 Toyota corolla 🙂


Steve

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Boeing or not going said:

If you see a good development team, far along with a 737 classic or 757, and then they stop it, why not buy the rights and bring them on to finish?

Again, I'd argue that, in this case, you're not likely buying the rights - you're buying the assets. Buying the rights implies that they are the sole owner of the rights to develop that item, and/or you're simply licensing the use of the asset from them for at cost per period of time or per unit sold. While that's a possibility (particularly the latter aspect: licensing the use, instead of purchasing outright), I'd argue that it isn't the best decision for an established developer (it's also somewhat of a risk, because you don't have full control of the asset when it's only licensed, yet your continued existence as a business depends in some part on sales of it).

A lot of people assume "hey, there's this partially-built thing out there - go pick it up and bring it to the finish line" as if it is just some easy thing, and a better option than building from the basics. In reality, that isn't exactly the case. Buying a model from another developer might be a good idea if you're trying to shave off some time and either don't have a modeler, or have one that isn't as experienced as the one who built the model you're trying to buy. Buying the sound work could cut some time, as well, but it all depends on how you have (or plan to) set up the sound, and/or perhaps don't have a sound engineer as good as the one who developed the asset you're trying to buy. Code is probably a bad idea, as you need to go through all of it to figure out how it all works, and there's also a decent amount of personal style out there in code. Sure, there are standards, but they're not always followed, which can make things difficult to follow. Of course, how that code drives all of the functions of the model, and sound set, and all of that is also made more complex by having to work with whatever you got from the other dev, or figure out how to modify it.

To be honest, I've looked at my own code projects and burnt them to the ground to start all over because it was simply easier that way. Keep in mind that the burnt down code was my own, that I understood, and developed to my own familiar standard. Someone else's code is code that I would have to work to understand, and may or may not be developed to code standards. There's a time cost to stuff like that, and there's also risk, as you may not find the bugs in someone else's code until much later, and then they can be extremely difficult to track down and eliminate. Heck, we even burned our own 737, and 747s to the ground when we made the NGX (after the original FS9 version), and the 747 (after the original FS9 and first FSX version) and started over...

So...sure, it might look logical on the surface, but if you dig a bit deeper, not only does taking over an asset not make as much sense (except in certain cases - examples mentioned earlier), licensing the rights to the asset makes even less sense to me, particularly if you already have a fully-staffed company that could do that work on their own, without the risks.

Edited by scandinavian13
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 1

Kyle Rodgers

Share this post


Link to post

Ok, so I took a further look at the 2012 PMDG presentation in Germany. Two quotes from Robert:

Quote

We have a very robust 737 package, and our development agenda has us going through the next two big Boeings, and then we've got something really nice up our sleeve after that, but that's not ready to be unveiled.

Quote

ROB: What we hear from you (the customer) is "we want to fly what we see when we go and travel", so you're gonna get the triple, you're gonna get the 74, and what you get after that would probably surprise you coming from us.

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Airbus!

ROB: I'm not saying anything.

Furthermore, in 2013, when on a stream with Froogle:

Quote

(On considering the 787 for development): You know, surprisingly, we're not, and I'm sure there's a couple of my competitors who just sat bolt-upright and said "oh my god, I know what we're doing next!". We have not gotten the data package on that airplane yet - these things cost money and it's just something we haven't gotten yet. There's a couple of other things we want to do first, so we're gonna do those. I'm sure we'll get there some day but there's just a couple of other things we want to do right now.

....

The 787 is just like a marvel of technology, but from a developer standpoint just the thought of that airplane makes me break out in a really prickly rash because it is just so software-driven. My fear is that there's a whole lot of stuff in there that we'd have to invent just to support the data-driven side of that airplane... but we'll get there some day, I'm sure.

Quote

(On other aircraft considerations):

Airbus // Uuuuum, I can't- I'm not in a position to comment

DC10 // No

707 // If I had the fountain of youth... We're focused on what interests our customers, and what interests you is what you see and interact with at your local airport, so unless the world starts miraculously flying 707s everywhere, you guys are gonna wanna see the Airbus, the NG, the triple, that sort of stuff, so those are the sort of things we're focused on.

 

 

So. I still think the reveal will be an aircraft. I believe it'll be an Airbus A380 or A350, and that Rob is currently deflecting to keep the speculation wild and not honing in. However, if it's not the A380, then I believe they'll shift to the eJets. There's little else in the way of popular aircraft and both the A380 and A350 were known aircraft 10 years ago, even if the A350 was only recently entered into service. Rob said this aircraft has been "percolating" in the background for 10 years - that doesn't necessarily mean in development for 10 years, just that they knew it'd come after the 747. Even back in 2012 (6 years ago) they already had the roadmap of NGX (released), 777 (in dev) and 747 (announcement). 

 

P.S Yes, you can see how busy I am at work, and yes, I'd better go home now. @rsrandazzo Do I get a private hint for doing all this research??

Edited by squerble
  • Like 1

Karl Brooker

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, squerble said:

Ok, so I took a further look at the 2012 PMDG presentation in Germany. Two quotes from Robert:

Furthermore, in 2013, when on a stream with Froogle:

 

 

So. I still think the reveal will be an aircraft. I believe it'll be an Airbus A380 or A350, and that Rob is currently deflecting to keep the speculation wild and not honing in. However, if it's not the A380, then I believe they'll shift to the eJets. There's little else in the way of popular aircraft and both the A380 and A350 were known aircraft 10 years ago, even if the A350 was only recently entered into service. Rob said this aircraft has been "percolating" in the background for 10 years - that doesn't necessarily mean in development for 10 years, just that they knew it'd come after the 747. Even back in 2012 (6 years ago) they already had the roadmap of NGX (released), 777 (in dev) and 747 (announcement). 

 

P.S Yes, you can see how busy I am at work, and yes, I'd better go home now. @rsrandazzo Do I get a private hint for doing all this research??

Impressive research! But if this has been in development for 10 years, I highly doubt it's an airplane.

Edited by Anders Bermann

Best regards,
--Anders Bermann--
____________________
Scandinavian VA

Pilot-ID: SAS2471

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Anders Bermann said:

Impressive research! But if this has been in development for 10 years, I highly doubt it's an airplane.

Impressive enough, you didn't read it properly? :biggrin: to quote myself:

 

19 minutes ago, squerble said:

 

Rob said this aircraft has been "percolating" in the background for 10 years - that doesn't necessarily mean in development for 10 years, just that they knew it'd come after the 747. Even back in 2012 (6 years ago) they already had the roadmap of NGX (released), 777 (in dev) and 747 (announcement). 

Edited by squerble

Karl Brooker

Share this post


Link to post

The 737NG has been released in its current state in... 2011? Not sure. It‘s old, outdated, flies well, sure, but has its limitations coming with the old technique. An airplane that would have been in developement over such a long time (no matter if actively worked on) would have had to be rewritten over and over again to stay up to modern standards - OR it would combine old and latest state of the art. And that‘s more than unlikely, all above we‘re talking about PMDG here and not any backyard company throwing V8s into VW Beetles... 

it is absolutely anti-logical that PMDG would release an airplane that has been in development since 2007/8. That‘s the age of the first iPhone!!! 

It HAS to be something working together with our existing PMDG (and even more maybe) addon airplanes but it will either enlarge the usability or it will change it. But for sure it will increase the market and the reputation for PMDG, anything else just doesn‘t make sense, not for my brain and not economically. A project of that time span is meant to make you grow, not just to sell another product.

 

Disclaimer: Yes, in my opinion.

Edited by Ephedrin
  • Like 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  
  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    30%
    $7,720.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...