I'm more confused now than before.  They basically showed stuff but they don't know if they will release it.  Why give an update at all I wonder.  I'm glad they are doing well with other contracts but I feel it would have been better without an update.

1 hour ago, sgreen91 said:

...but I feel it would have been better without an update.

Or at least without this update.  They've made it seem like they're playing a little fast and loose, and maybe they are, but I'm not sure that's actually the case.  They just didn't set up their announcement very well.  I do this (corporate PR) for a living so I pay attention to how things like this work, or don't work.  If it was me, instead of throwing all that copy into the post, I would have set up a few categories.  So... we've been silent for a long time because we've been working on these really exciting government and institutional projects (Texan II for USAF Pilot Training Next, T-38, Boultbee Spitfire and other Spitfire sims for institutions).  Those won't necessarily lead to consumer products but they've pushed our tech to new levels and there'll be consumer dividends down the road.  However, we haven't forgotten about you guys, we've heard for a long time you're excited about our Aerostar and now we're building one, early days and no timeline but here it is.  Closer in, we're building the Cub and B-17 for P3D, not just ports but new versions from the ground up.  Oh, and there's a strategy game.  All of this may take longer than you or we would like but that's because we're funding this ourselves with a small team instead of getting investors, over-expanding, losing quality and losing control.  So that's the story, good stuff happening.  Or something along those lines.  It's not far different from what they posted except that if you do it this way, you set expectations up front, and you preempt a lot of questions, and that's better than having things bleed out in your Facebook comments the way they've been doing.  I'm happy to cut them slack because, good as they are at their promotional videos and such, they're not really professional communicators - they probably felt a lot of pressure to say something to the community and the server outing made it worse, so they threw it up quickly and caused some confusion and left some people thinking there's less here than meets the eye.

It certainly is an interesting piece of communication. When you scrape the fuzzy hype, its like, we focus our equity on the Pro market with products that will be difficult to release to the consumers, we look into upgrading two oldies for the later and maybe (note the two "would") developping our Aerostar which is presently grounded. As a long time customer with plenty of their products (since the P47 for FS9 !), I don't see really anything to get my teeth into. The Texan 2 and Talon 38A would have been nice... 

 

 

Edited May 11, 20197 yr by domkle

12 hours ago, zmak said:

Flying military planes in a civilian sim that wont dog fight or fire bullets is a bit like kissing your sister,,not very exciting

DCS owns that arena

😂. I beg to disagree here. Just flying a fighter, prop or jet, is interesting in itself, even without the combat dimension. Even trainers. They are  special aircraft, always ready to bite you if you don't behave. They keep you on your toes like no other aircraft does. 

42 minutes ago, domkle said:

😂. I beg to disagree here. Just flying a fighter, prop or jet, is interesting in itself, even without the combat dimension. Even trainers. They are  special aircraft, always ready to bite you if you don't behave. They keep you on your toes like no other aircraft does. 

Plus, you get to enjoy that special machine wherever you want in the world. With the combat sims, you just have that little box to fly around that you've seen a million times.

21 minutes ago, Sethos1988 said:

Plus, you get to enjoy that special machine wherever you want in the world. With the combat sims, you just have that little box to fly around that you've seen a million times.

To Busy engaged in battle to look at scenery. Take my off the ball and game over, would be the same in real world. I got plenty of cruising civilian planes to float about over ORBX scenery low and slow so Im not missing out on anything , just keeping it all real 😃

10 hours ago, domkle said:

...we focus our equity on the Pro market with products that will be difficult to release to the consumers..

You know, I can't help thinking about Dodosim - a great development shop that got pulled into professional commitments and never found its way back to the consumer market.  Clearly not an exact analogy - I think they were/are a two-person operation.  Still, it's got to be difficult for a relatively small developer (A2A is, what, eight core people? Hard to say because there's been some odd reshuffling recently, but around that many...) to balance professional and consumer work.  The professional contracts have a lot going for them - they're probably lucrative, they're prestigious, they demand things that build out your skill set, and they credential you for more professional work - which you want to do because it's a) lucrative, as noted, and b) more profitable.  For example, with a professional customer, you're building for a small number of pretty much homogeneous machines, so you don't have to deal with the cost or headaches of doing customer service for ten or twenty thousand different installations.  So with the best of intentions, a developer in that situation might wind up favoring professional over consumer.  As A2A says, or at least hints, they could keep up a faster pace if they expanded rapidly but that creates its own host of problems - quality issues, and also loss of control of your business if you bring in outside investors.  So it's really not an easy situation.  Yes, they could have done a much better job of describing their projects but it's got to be some kind of impossible-seeming juggling act behind the scenes.

Excellent analysis Alan.

Me too I cannot refrain making a parallel between Dodosim and A2A.

1 hour ago, Alan_A said:

You know, I can't help thinking about Dodosim - a great development shop that got pulled into professional commitments and never found its way back to the consumer market.  Clearly not an exact analogy - I think they were/are a two-person operation.  Still, it's got to be difficult for a relatively small developer (A2A is, what, eight core people? Hard to say because there's been some odd reshuffling recently, but around that many...) to balance professional and consumer work.  The professional contracts have a lot going for them - they're probably lucrative, they're prestigious, they demand things that build out your skill set, and they credential you for more professional work - which you want to do because it's a) lucrative, as noted, and b) more profitable.  For example, with a professional customer, you're building for a small number of pretty much homogeneous machines, so you don't have to deal with the cost or headaches of doing customer service for ten or twenty thousand different installations.  So with the best of intentions, a developer in that situation might wind up favoring professional over consumer.  As A2A says, or at least hints, they could keep up a faster pace if they expanded rapidly but that creates its own host of problems - quality issues, and also loss of control of your business if you bring in outside investors.  So it's really not an easy situation.  Yes, they could have done a much better job of describing their projects but it's got to be some kind of impossible-seeming juggling act behind the scenes.

I agree. Maybe I read too much in Scott G's post but I had that weird feeling that it was kind of an embarrassed "See you later, guys, we got to sort out things !". There's no commitment for any product .We'll look into this and into  that. The wording about the Aerostar or the Spit' or the P51 is quite vague. And its pretty clear that the 38A and the Texan will not come to our end very soon (an understatement) .  We shouldn't see a new aircraft from them before the second half of 2020, at best.

Not that they owe us anything, by the way. They brought a lot to the hobby already. And the USAF  brings more profit  than a myriad of pesky gamers, I am sure.  

Your Dodosim analogy is pretty much to the point but maybe  leaning on the pessimistic side. Looking at a brighter side, I see PMDG doing both markets, after all.  So maybe they are in a transition phase.  You know what Springsteen sings "At the end of every hard earned day people find some reason to believe" 😉. 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 11, 20197 yr by domkle

3 hours ago, domkle said:

So maybe they are in a transition phase. 

Seems likely - and I agree, there's no telling how it could come out. They might easily have a plan they're not telling us about - and if not, or not yet, it's quite possible they'll come up with one.  They're smart people and they're good at what they do.  The Dodosim analogy is more about identifying (or maybe dramatizing, or maybe even over-dramatizing) the challenge, than it is about making predictions.

I was also thinking of PMDG as a developer that's doing a good job of straddling both camps.  Of course, their pace of consumer development is very slow and always has been.  Whereas with A2A it seems to be slowing - maybe to a PMDG pace?  If so, that wouldn't be terrible, once people get used to it.  And if people do, then maybe A2A will feel less pressure to say more or different things than they need to.

Something else that occurred to me is that even if A2A leaves a gap - thanks, say, to a slower development tempo - others will come along to fill it.  I know there's a well-established A2A cult that won't look at anybody else's work, but for those that are more flexible, some good offerings are on the way.  The Wing 42 Lockheed Vega is a good example of the sort of project that A2A might once have spent time on (definitely too niche for them now).  It's very nicely done and it's now back under active development.  PILOTS just announced that their Boeing 314 B Clipper is moving forward and due for a July release - with an Alexander Metzger FDE, no less.  So there'll be interesting, historic, "study-level" things to fly, even if they're not Accu-Sim.  You know, I'm reminded that something more than a decade ago, I was really resentful of a company called Shockwave that I'd never heard of, that brought out a Spitfire to compete with RealAir.  Of course, Shockwave turned into A2A shortly thereafter and you know the rest.  It was a good lesson about never saying never, and staying open to newcomers.  On the other hand, becoming an A2A fan didn't make me any less of a RealAir fan (and personally, I still prefer RealAir for flight dynamics).  Short version - good things could come from elsewhere, and also from A2A.

Last thing I'll say for now - "Reason to Believe" is, for me, maybe the darkest Springsteen song in the canon.  I mean, the guy is kicking a dead dog thinking there's some outside chance maybe it'll get up.  My reaction to that was always more despair than hope.

But, on the other hand... you may be onto something... 😎

6 hours ago, Alan_A said:

 

Both a very dark song and, in a way, a hymn to the absurd thirst we have to believe that things will get better.  

I’ve been more or less  away from this hobby for a little while as I do from time to time. Thanks for the heads up about  the Vega and Clipper.

Re Bruce, +1 to both the despair and the absurd hope. 

And +1 to the (WIP) Vega and the (future) Clipper as well. 

And if you haven’t yet checked out Manfred’s C-47, that may be the best of the lot - not A2A systems depth but a great experience in its own right. Let me know if you need a hand tracking down the latest build - not easy given the number of versions. Am traveling today but can get you a link late tonight or tomorrow. If you’re already on board with it, that’s even better, of course. 

7 minutes ago, Alan_A said:

Re Bruce, +1 to both the despair and the absurd hope. 

And +1 to the (WIP) Vega and the (future) Clipper as well. 

And if you haven’t yet checked out Manfred’s C-47, that may be the best of the lot - not A2A systems depth but a great experience in its own right. Let me know if you need a hand tracking down the latest build - not easy given the number of versions. Am traveling today but can get you a link late tonight or tomorrow. If you’re already on board with it, that’s even better, of course. 

Thanks Alan, yes it’d be good to have a new look at the C47.  No hurry though, right now I am deep in the Texan/Harvard T6 manuals  trying to get back to flying this great aircraft, specially to and from short mountain runways... 

Spitfire ?  In FSX / P3D / X-Plane ???? C'mon.... don't trick me....

I once believed in that... They're very nice in terms of cockpit and even some systems details, but as soon as you start even just taxiing... if you ever tried DCS or IL2 you will feel bad... not to talk as you - virtually - get airborne...

That being said, it's great to learn they're active. Honestly I have to say I'm glad they didn't announce any diversion towards X-Plane like some authors appear to be "forced" to do lately... and rather opted to keep concentrated in what they already do well.

But, unfortunately I dropped A2A products the day I dropped FSX and decided that whenever - very few times per year - my simmer bi-polarity makes me install something of the like I buy a professional 1 month non-recurring P3D license and enjoy ( "enjoy" ) P3D sometimes for a whole week !!!! But I only install stuff I bought, and unfortunately and due to their pricing policy for P3D stuff, I do not buy anything from A2A for P3D because I would have to buy their "non-Student" line ... which is way way too expensive.... With a couple of add-ons I can almost buy a new update for my ELITE Garmin database or a new scenery database... or maybe even that upcoming PSX 744 NG FMC update.... Or a few modules more for DCS 🙂

Edited May 13, 20197 yr by cagari-cagarou

On 5/12/2019 at 8:39 AM, domkle said:

Thanks Alan, yes it’d be good to have a new look at the C47.  No hurry though, right now I am deep in the Texan/Harvard T6 manuals  trying to get back to flying this great aircraft, specially to and from short mountain runways... 

It's funny, I just did a long stretch in the T6 - figured I'd try to get my fundamentals back in shape.  Am now managing to land it consistently - it helped when I gave up on wheel landings and decided to three-point it all the time.

As promised, here's a link to the most up-to-date version of Manfred's C-47.  Actually it's a link to a link - click on the Dropbox link in Manfred's post (#5, should be right at the top) and you'll have everything you need.

The C-47 is my main ride at the moment - never did the virtual airline thing before, but I've got DC-3 Airways hours to build... 😎