mcbellette

Could PMDG possibly...

Recommended Posts

Hi PMDG staff,

 

I just wanted to put forth an idea for a future aircraft. One of my favourite aircraft of all time is the Pilatus PC-12. Currently, there is a PC-12 available for FSX from another developer (Flight1). However, this product is showing its age in the face of new ways of creating aircraft and virtual cockpits. It’s an older version of the aircraft, with the current model being the PC-12NG. The systems included are fairly basic as well. Nothing against the Fliggt1 product - I still use it alot. But I’d love it if PMDG would do another prop aircraft - the PC-12NG, with all of its systems and the new glass cockpit.

 

So my question is, could we see PMDG doing a PC-12NG at some stage down the track? I love the airliners, but I increasingly find my FSX time limited with work, two kids under 8 and a new 2 month-old baby, which means mostly shorter, regional flights for me. Would be nice to balance the long range heavy metal with something for shorter hops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

If PMDDG is going to built a PC-12 you would found that info on the forum in the posts.Since there isn't any you now the answet to that.On the other hand Carenado has a great version of the plane so you may try out their PC-12

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The model on offer at Carenado is not the PC-12NG. It's the same model as the Flight1 product I mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Matthew, with regard to not having time to do the classic big-boy-Boeing routes: 

I also don't have all the time I'd like to do realistic 737 routes.....But....since we're all sitting in front of a PC pretending we're really flying, how hard of a mental leap is it to take it one step further?  I fly from Chicago to St. Louis, or Chicago to Milwaukee, and they are both just a bit more than 1 hour flights.  If you must, just pretend you came from somewhere much farther.  Just remember not to fill the tanks up anymore than necessary and you'll enjoy the "busy" phases of flight in that one hour, the takeoff/climb phase and the descent/landing phase.  That's where all the action is anyhow.

Even when I fly across the country I break it up into 1-2 hour segments (hops).  You get to experience more regional airports (I consider 6,000 ft. runways a minimum though for the 737 (although I can get 'er done in less) and it's more enjoyable than being at 39,000 ft. for 4-5 hours watching the clouds and fields roll by.

Take lots of pictures of the kids, they grow up fast and you can't have to many pics.  Also back them up to another PC or an external drive- can't tell you how many folks I've heard of losing everything because of one drive failure.

Mark Trainer

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hell, I've even flown the Boeing 747-400 on routes that you wouldn't normally fly them. New York to Boston, New York to Washington, New York to Chicago, London to Amsterdam....really, who's going to stop me.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Captain Kevin said:

Hell, I've even flown the Boeing 747-400 on routes that you wouldn't normally fly them. New York to Boston, New York to Washington, New York to Chicago, London to Amsterdam....really, who's going to stop me.

But you don‘t want to fly the 77L because of the lack of realism as the airlines use the 772 on their routes? 

😜

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Ephedrin said:

But you don‘t want to fly the 77L because of the lack of realism as the airlines use the 772 on their routes? 

😜

I primarily fly my own airline, so the routes themselves aren't much of a concern. That said, my Boeing 777-200ERs are powered by the Pratt & Whitney engines. Think screenshots might look a little weird to see a plane that's supposed to have Pratt & Whitney engines suddenly have GE90s....and raked wingtips.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about PMDG Concord this save time required to complete a flight.😁

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Captain Kevin said:

Hell, I've even flown the Boeing 747-400 on routes that you wouldn't normally fly them. New York to Boston, New York to Washington, New York to Chicago, London to Amsterdam....really, who's going to stop me.

Good to hear that, I do the same in my country where people might say " Oh seriously ? a 747 for this route ?? " ... but who can stop me enjoying the plane when I'm short on time ? 

-S.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Samany69 said:

Good to hear that, I do the same in my country where people might say " Oh seriously ? a 747 for this route ?? " ... but who can stop me enjoying the plane when I'm short on time ? 

Japan Air and ANA actually did this when they still had their 747s, as evidenced by the fact that the 747-400D even exists. Shortest 747 flight I've flown in real life was NRT to TPE and back, though I've also done the same in a 777, so certainly not unheard of.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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