The painfully time consuming path to creating something new

[GMVitus 29]

 

Hello Avsim!

I would like to share some of the joy and some of the agony I experienced over the past few years working on the simulation of ONE add-on for flight simulator. This is partially a bit of a personal story, a bit of shameless product placement and a rant.

I started working on the Lockheed Vega about three years ago. The decision to work on that particular aircraft was driven by my passion for vintage aviation and the idea that the simulation of an aircraft like the Vega would be simple enough to complete within about a year time. Boy, was I wrong.

While the essential bits of this iconic aircraft - the 3d model and textures - were completed rather quickly, the simulation of the systems is an entirely different matter. The reason being, that I couldn't be satisfied producing an aircraft that just looks good and flies well - I knew from the start that it is the systems simulation that transform a good aircraft to an outstanding add-on.

I launched Wing42 about a year ago and with it released the Lockheed Vega as an Early Access product. I received some criticism for that decision, being told that Early-Access is "money-grabbing" or "pay-for-beta". I whole-heartily disagree! While it is true that the sales I make with the Early Access definitely help financing the development, my main motivation to go down that path was to tap into the hearts and minds of the users and through the interaction with the customers shape the product as close to perfection as I am able to. And let me tell you: the feedback I received through this process has been way beyond my imagination. I can confidently say that the Wing42 Vega would've never gotten to this level of realism without the feedback and criticism gained through the Early-Access program.

The overarching goal of the development is to provide the user with an experience, rather than just an aircraft. I am trying to replicate the experience of operating an aircraft in the 1920s as closely as the platform allows. This immersion into the past is what this add-on represents - at least to me, and I hope for my customers too.

To facilitate said immersion, I tried to replicate operating procedures well beyond the actual flying of the aircraft. With version 0.85 I implemented an interactive ground crew together with a dialog interface. The interface is used to instruct your rampie to install the various ground equipment available and he will respond to you and inform you when the instructed tasks are completed. Apart from the programming of this interface, I also commissioned some artwork to give "Heinrich" a face and I spent considerable time recording the different responses. Another example of how the Vega tries to immerse you into the 1920s is the design of the various 2d panels that come with the add-on. The goal with the UI/UX is to incorporate design features of that time and give every interface the look and feel of a piece of paper. As an example for that, have a look at what I am working on at the moment. The upcoming version 0.90 of the aircraft will feature the new "Aircraft Desk" which is used to interact with aircraft log and engine log as well as provide some feedback on the wear & tear of the airplane. I am currently working 70-80 hours per week on this and many other new features, in the hope to get it done by the beginning of June.

So far I received overwhelmingly positive feedback from my customers. I can't recall a single one who was unhappy with his purchase. The feedback that I get from users is mostly suggestions of things they like to see in a future update, or a report of some feature that doesn't work just yet. Despite that, sales have been abysmal lately. I am under no illusion that by itself, this project would ever be able to recuperate the immense expenses that I sunk into this add-on. But my hope is that the technology that I created in the process of developing this aircraft can be transferred into future products as well and in that way transform Wing42 into a viable business. However, I am still a bit disheartened by the lack of interest by the community as a whole, therefore I'd like to end my ramblings with two questions for you:

1. What do you think is the reason for the disregard of the add-on in the wider flight sim community?
2. I welcome any suggestions how to boost the profile of Wing42 and the Lockheed Vega.

Lastly, I want to thank all of the supporters of my work and everyone who already purchased the Lockheed Vega. I am certain you will be blown away with the release of the next update and I'll do my best to deliver as fast as possible.

Kind Regards,
Otmar

[Jim Young 2,356]

Otmar,

 

Your topic violated our “no advertising” rule in the AVSIM Terms of Service so was rightly removed by one of our moderators.  AVSIM’s existence is based on paid advertising and donations from our membership.  Therefore you cannot advertise on AVSIM without prior permission from the AVSIM Staff.  I certainly enjoyed your presentation and the amount of research and time you placed in creating it.  Your website is very nice and like they way you created a “Tweet” or question to AVSIM about the joy and some of the agony you experienced over the past few years working on the simulation of just one add-on for flight simulator. 

Therefore, I have decided to approve your “advertisement” but will not allow any additional topics concerning this subject.  Discussions like yours need to be made and I think applicable for the flight simulation community as other developers have suffered the same consequences throughout their careers in developing add-ons for flight simulation.

I would like you to remove the “live” or “active” link to your site in your signature as well as the active link in your signature logo as only inactive links are allowed (see Policies and Rules/Signature Rules above).  Only when you click on a paid advertisement on advertising on AVSIM are you able to have the privilege to have an active link to your website/store.

I will reactivate the topic and post the above, to explain my decision to approve this topic.  Thank you  for contacting AVSIM and best of luck in your research and development.

Best regards,

Jim

[HighBypass 2,339]

Hi Otmar. 

Firstly - Thanks Jim for still allowing this thread, I would not have seen it otherwise, and neither would other AVSIM members. Which leads me to question one - disregard of the add-on:

I suppose the desire for wanting an add-on plane is that the user has an interest in that plane or its variants. They may love all kinds of vintage aircraft, or they may have flown in or even piloted such a craft, or had friends or family who had done so. Or they may just like the look of a particular aircraft and want to fly it, at least virtually! Not everyone into flightsimming likes the same aircraft or genre and time frame, yet some are more popular than others.

I personally prefer more modern aircraft, more of a jet guy...although I do like the sound of a radial (or 4 if you include the Constellation)! The "oldest" plane I have in my virtual hangar is a Cessna 195 - I guess I liked the look of it at the time!

I would think, judging by some of the posts on AVSIM that there are plenty of guys & gals out there who like spinny bits of wood (not carbon composite!) on the front of their planes - the older the better (the planes, not the actual people LOL). However, AVSIM is not a particularly large customer base.

Question number 2 - no idea sorry. I mean a search for "Lockheed Vega" brings up your product in second place - so you're definitely on the front page of google along with numerous reviews. 

Your website is very nicely put together IMHO and has that vintage look. Well done!

All I can do is wish you all the best in your venture.

[flyforever 267]

This is a very nice account of the struggle of small developers in this hobby. As you know, the story of great projects that are eventually abandoned goes on forever.

I suspect, in part, the reason why many small developers don't make it  or move on, as you point out,  is under estimating the time and expense of creating a product for a small market.

It's not an accident that most developers are either a one person show, or they have virtual part timers from all over the world.

If I were thinking to be a developer and wanted to make money, I'd create a utility like FS Panel, which allowed many enthusiasts to create their own panels.

It's interesting to see, however, that even FS Panel was abandoned with the advent of virtual panels in FSX.

Lastly, strategy and marketing play a large part in getting customers to want your product and to bring you income.

For example, you focused on interesting features, which require a lot of time, but do not represent a value that a customer is willing to pay for. What I mean is that you could have developed the Vega without the time consuming features in considerably less time, sold it for , let's say $19, and had an immediate idea of the market for the plane at that price. Then , as with some other developers, you could have developed the Vega Pro for and additional amount.  This is just an example. I am not suggesting that you did it wrong. I am simply commenting on the fact that you have spent 3 times the time you originally had estimated.

There's an interview with a vintage aircraft developer, and in it they talk specifically about the "sweet spot" for making a profit with their models. They are not "systems intensive", but they bring out planes on a regular basis.

tony

 

 

tony

 

[Lorby_SI 2,036]

6 hours ago, GMVitus said:

sales have been abysmal lately. I am under no illusion that by itself, this project would ever be able to recuperate the immense expenses that I sunk into this add-on.

Hello Otmar,

welcome to the club. I'm afraid that is just how it is.

While many think that we small developers underestimate the effort, I don't think that is true. Many of us have a professional background one way or the other (for example, I have been a professional programmer for more than 20 years). But what many people do, customers and developers alike, is to overestimate the size and commercial viability of the flightsim community. There are a lot less people involved in this hobby than it may appear from the outside, and unless you hit a mainstream "nerve", then the sales that you are seeing are perfectly normal for a niche product in a niche. My personal metric from experience is this: look at the number of views that a thread about a particular product gets here on Avsim. Divide by the number of pages that the thread has. 10% of that result is the number of people who seriously consider buying the product. And be mindful of the total numbers, how many views the various threads get, how many people participate in the online polls, the number of sales that are on the bestseller lists etc. 

In my case, I had no illusions about commercial viability - I started this as a hobby with no hopes that it should become anything more than that. I have been told early on by fellow developers that the best you can hope for as a small addon dev is 3000 - 5000 € per year. That is roughly 1% of the total cost for implementing the Lorby addons if I had to pay myself, my consultants and my testers - like I would have to in the real software business. So after 100 years of continuous sales I might break even.

There will be many people who will try to tell you otherwise, making the market bigger in their minds and hearts than it really is. Don't listen to them - trust the hard fact, presented in your numbers and your eyes.

Personally I have all but given up on the payware market. Staying with the thought example about cost, then if a customer requests support, it would have been better if he didn't buy the product in the first place. A single hour of my professional time is 10 times more expensive than the price that he paid for the addon.

And I have to agree with what Tony wrote above: only the new sells good. For a couple of weeks, every new product that you release will do fairly well. After that time it falls back into obscurity. You can see that happening simply by watching the best sellers list for example on Simmarket. 

Best regards and best wishes that you may find your enthusiasm again

Edited May 17, 2019 by Lorby_SI

[John_Cillis 2,406]

o

6 hours ago, GMVitus said:

 

Hello Avsim!

I would like to share some of the joy and some of the agony I experienced over the past few years working on the simulation of ONE add-on for flight simulator. This is partially a bit of a personal story, a bit of shameless product placement and a rant.

I started working on the Lockheed Vega about three years ago. The decision to work on that particular aircraft was driven by my passion for vintage aviation and the idea that the simulation of an aircraft like the Vega would be simple enough to complete within about a year time. Boy, was I wrong.

While the essential bits of this iconic aircraft - the 3d model and textures - were completed rather quickly, the simulation of the systems is an entirely different matter. The reason being, that I couldn't be satisfied producing an aircraft that just looks good and flies well - I knew from the start that it is the systems simulation that transform a good aircraft to an outstanding add-on.

I launched Wing42 about a year ago and with it released the Lockheed Vega as an Early Access product. I received some criticism for that decision, being told that Early-Access is "money-grabbing" or "pay-for-beta". I whole-heartily disagree! While it is true that the sales I make with the Early Access definitely help financing the development, my main motivation to go down that path was to tap into the hearts and minds of the users and through the interaction with the customers shape the product as close to perfection as I am able to. And let me tell you: the feedback I received through this process has been way beyond my imagination. I can confidently say that the Wing42 Vega would've never gotten to this level of realism without the feedback and criticism gained through the Early-Access program.

The overarching goal of the development is to provide the user with an experience, rather than just an aircraft. I am trying to replicate the experience of operating an aircraft in the 1920s as closely as the platform allows. This immersion into the past is what this add-on represents - at least to me, and I hope for my customers too.

To facilitate said immersion, I tried to replicate operating procedures well beyond the actual flying of the aircraft. With version 0.85 I implemented an interactive ground crew together with a dialog interface. The interface is used to instruct your rampie to install the various ground equipment available and he will respond to you and inform you when the instructed tasks are completed. Apart from the programming of this interface, I also commissioned some artwork to give "Heinrich" a face and I spent considerable time recording the different responses. Another example of how the Vega tries to immerse you into the 1920s is the design of the various 2d panels that come with the add-on. The goal with the UI/UX is to incorporate design features of that time and give every interface the look and feel of a piece of paper. As an example for that, have a look at what I am working on at the moment. The upcoming version 0.90 of the aircraft will feature the new "Aircraft Desk" which is used to interact with aircraft log and engine log as well as provide some feedback on the wear & tear of the airplane. I am currently working 70-80 hours per week on this and many other new features, in the hope to get it done by the beginning of June.

So far I received overwhelmingly positive feedback from my customers. I can't recall a single one who was unhappy with his purchase. The feedback that I get from users is mostly suggestions of things they like to see in a future update, or a report of some feature that doesn't work just yet. Despite that, sales have been abysmal lately. I am under no illusion that by itself, this project would ever be able to recuperate the immense expenses that I sunk into this add-on. But my hope is that the technology that I created in the process of developing this aircraft can be transferred into future products as well and in that way transform Wing42 into a viable business. However, I am still a bit disheartened by the lack of interest by the community as a whole, therefore I'd like to end my ramblings with two questions for you:

1. What do you think is the reason for the disregard of the add-on in the wider flight sim community?
2. I welcome any suggestions how to boost the profile of Wing42 and the Lockheed Vega.

Lastly, I want to thank all of the supporters of my work and everyone who already purchased the Lockheed Vega. I am certain you will be blown away with the release of the next update and I'll do my best to deliver as fast as possible.

Kind Regards,
Otmar

Development certainly has its share of pains, especially with "niche" aircraft that not all download or fly.  Plus buyers find it hard to purchase an "early access, still under development" product in order to subsidize a developer's efforts, most people do not have that type of budget or owe developers that, and I am a freeware developer in the hobby, and professional developer for big business, and my big business clients (former, now that I've had to go out on disability ten years before retirement age) would not accept subsidizing development.  Even the most basic buyers expect a completed product when they buy, especially when it is a niche product vs. a contemporary, GA or commercial transport product.  I went to your web page and your product does evoke an era of nostalgia in me, I think of Wiley Post, an aviator not often mentioned in our hobby.  Good luck on gaining interest.

John

[GMVitus 29]

Hi guys,

Thank you for the feedback!

Mark, it is quite evident that you are not alone in your preference when it comes to the ship you want to commandeer. When you look for anything flightsim related, I do find that there is an overwhelming bias on modern aviation. That is perfectly fine, I am more than happy to cater to a niche of the niche and I am absolutely convinced that the niche is big enough to make a living, provided that the product is right and the word is out.

 

Tony,

I don't even think that this is a problem endemic to the flight sim scene. From my point of view this is just regular business, no matter where you look. The problems are always the same, no matter what you try to sell: you need a good product and you need to find your customers. And if you fail in either of those, your project fails. So much is true no matter in what area you do business in.

One thing I disagree with though is that doing the same as everybody else is the solution. I am convinced that the Vega has an edge in the market that most developers can't compete with right now and that is entirely due to the fact that I spent so much time developing the physics engine. And while the complexity might not be a feature that convinces everybody - especially when it comes with a price tag - it is certainly something that resonates with a lot of people.

 

 

Oliver,

Thank you for your insight. Wow, that sounds rough......

The mere existence of companies like PMDG, A2A, Carenado, Aerosoft, Milviz, etc. show that there is a business opportunity in the market. Imho it is a question of finding the right product and find the customers for it, too. I think you and me both are in this for the love of aviation. Whether or not small me can turn Wing42 into a viable business is to be seen 🙂

 

 

John,

I think you're cherry-picking your examples. I can easily give you counter example from the "real world" where money-first-product-later is entirely normal. For example: did you ever contract someone to build a house? I bet he wanted to see a big chunk of money before he even started. I am a professional engineer and in my field it was normal to get paid an initial lump sum to start the development process. The remainder of the price was paid on delivery.

But now take my product in comparison: a customer who bought the aircraft when the early access was launched would've paid 25 Euros for the add-on. By the time the development is done the price will be almost double that, however those early customers won't have to pay the difference - as would be normal in ANY OTHER INDUSTRY. On the other hand I honestly believe that the price of the Vega always reflected the value of the product at the time of purchase.

I'm glad you like the website! It is that nostalgia I want to tap into 🙂

[Skywolf 992]

Wow - this is the first time I hearing about this plane and thank you for your honesty.

As a business owner, starting any business is always a fun challenge.  Doesn't matter what the outcome will be but it is always fun.  Keep the process fun in mind.  There will be days where it is ultra challening and no cash is coming but you have to stick it out and push the envelope - that is where limits gets broken and pushes you even further.  I truly wish you tons of success on your endeavor.  I want you to grow your company and be up in the ranks of A2A, PMDG, FSLabs, Leonardo, Majestic etc (Always be in the A-Team Players Club).

There is a plane company which churns out planes after planes but they really do not have any realism at all (some planes may have something, but I am not their buyer anymore - not naming them).  For some buyers it works.  You always have to know who your audience is.  Never be jack of all trades.  Pick a side and flourish.

I hope you can incorporate A2A's glass tech with rain etc on this bird (I believe it is free for developers).  For me, the entire realism of the aircraft is the key.  VR experience is 100% important.  In the upcoming years, VR will improve (we simmers already push hardware envelope for having pretty decent video cards).

I always wondered what checklist a plane like yours will have when there are engine failures etc b/c back in time.

Have a great day,

Skywolf

 

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by Skywolf

[GMVitus 29]

Hi Skywolf,

Thank you for your contribution! Man, I whole-heartily agree with everything you write!

That leaves only one aspect to comment on: You're not the only one to suggest the A2A glass and I am torn. I read through their SDK and to my disappointment noted that it is currently not possible to simulate windscreen wipers with their module. So now I need to choose: either I spend some weeks developing my own system, or I remove the animation code from the manually-operated wipers of the Vega and implement the A2A glass. Ooor I implement the glass, but the wipers are kinda pointless... tough...

And to answer your question: back in the day the checklist wasn't "invented" yet! As far as I recall, the first checklist came with the B17. That being said, I did write up a checklist that comes with the Vega, however abnormal procedures are not covered. I think for most aircraft from that era the official procedure is: if something goes wrong, try your best and pray. 😁

[John_Cillis 2,406]

8 hours ago, GMVitus said:

Hi guys,

Thank you for the feedback!

Mark, it is quite evident that you are not alone in your preference when it comes to the ship you want to commandeer. When you look for anything flightsim related, I do find that there is an overwhelming bias on modern aviation. That is perfectly fine, I am more than happy to cater to a niche of the niche and I am absolutely convinced that the niche is big enough to make a living, provided that the product is right and the word is out.

 

Tony,

I don't even think that this is a problem endemic to the flight sim scene. From my point of view this is just regular business, no matter where you look. The problems are always the same, no matter what you try to sell: you need a good product and you need to find your customers. And if you fail in either of those, your project fails. So much is true no matter in what area you do business in.

One thing I disagree with though is that doing the same as everybody else is the solution. I am convinced that the Vega has an edge in the market that most developers can't compete with right now and that is entirely due to the fact that I spent so much time developing the physics engine. And while the complexity might not be a feature that convinces everybody - especially when it comes with a price tag - it is certainly something that resonates with a lot of people.

 

 

Oliver,

Thank you for your insight. Wow, that sounds rough......

The mere existence of companies like PMDG, A2A, Carenado, Aerosoft, Milviz, etc. show that there is a business opportunity in the market. Imho it is a question of finding the right product and find the customers for it, too. I think you and me both are in this for the love of aviation. Whether or not small me can turn Wing42 into a viable business is to be seen 🙂

 

 

John,

I think you're cherry-picking your examples. I can easily give you counter example from the "real world" where money-first-product-later is entirely normal. For example: did you ever contract someone to build a house? I bet he wanted to see a big chunk of money before he even started. I am a professional engineer and in my field it was normal to get paid an initial lump sum to start the development process. The remainder of the price was paid on delivery.

But now take my product in comparison: a customer who bought the aircraft when the early access was launched would've paid 25 Euros for the add-on. By the time the development is done the price will be almost double that, however those early customers won't have to pay the difference - as would be normal in ANY OTHER INDUSTRY. On the other hand I honestly believe that the price of the Vega always reflected the value of the product at the time of purchase.

I'm glad you like the website! It is that nostalgia I want to tap into 🙂

"John,

I think you're cherry-picking your examples. I can easily give you counter example from the "real world" where money-first-product-later is entirely normal. For example: did you ever contract someone to build a house? I bet he wanted to see a big chunk of money before he even started. I am a professional engineer and in my field it was normal to get paid an initial lump sum to start the development process. The remainder of the price was paid on delivery."

I was not the one who broke Avsim's rules by advertising a payware product here.  I've bought three homes, and for the price I paid I expected finished home, so your analogy does not hold water, one does not move into an unfinished home.  As said, I have been a businessman for more than 40 years now, with many happy customers, and a freeware provider for our hobby, with many happy customers, when I released freeware I did not release an unfinished product, and I enhanced the products for free, or fixed bugs for free if members caught them. 

I have also contributed to payware products and the payware providers always released completed projects.  That said, if your project is flyable, bug free, then the buyer will decide to purchase it.  But sim payware is not like buying a home, the customer base does not expect to finance an unfinished product to get it started, if the product is unfinished.  Some payware providers tend to think they are big businessmen selling to car and home buyers, when in reality they are selling to hobbyists and Joe consumer.  Sim payware should never be compared to big ticket purchases, it is a false analogy.

You are entitled to succeed in your venture, provided you heed the adage "the customer is always right" rather than heeding the adage "Always be closing the sale".

[Lorby_SI 2,036]

10 hours ago, GMVitus said:

Imho it is a question of finding the right product and find the customers for it, too.

That is what every businessman on this planet tries to do. In the flightsim market, your chances of pulling that off are about 0.02 to 1. Which isn't that bad, all things considered. But one product is only temporary, to build a business, you need a long term strategy.

Planning a business that is supposed to support your (whole) life is not about optimism or hope, it is about hard facts and numbers. "Business arts", sales planning, marketing are sciences too.

• If your sales are down, don't invest too much time into features of your one product right now. Obviously, only a few people are interested in that particular model, and no matter how many additional features you squeeze into it, that will not change. On the other hand, people who are interested in it, buy the product no matter what (if it isn't too expensive).
• Analyze your market, gather as many numbers as you can. How many people are using the forums (number of views!) how many copies are sold of other products, especially those of the same type than my own, how big are the competitors, etc. The goal is to find out how big the target market is as a whole
• Diversify, make a few more planes, observe the sales, then expand into the direction of the most successful one
• Don't stick to airplanes, try other things too. Your programmatic modules may be usable as stand alone apps too.
• Talk to your fellow developers, share your experiences, take note of theirs
• Over time, try to build a team, don't do everything on your own.
• Depending on how old you are - don't spend too much total effort on a futile exercise. That induces stress and your health won't thank you for it.
• Always think in terms of cost - set an hourly rate for your work, and sum up the hours that you spend working on something - balance them against the income. Ask yourself, what a real software company would do. 
• IMO the P3D/FSX addon market is primarily driven by the airliner pilots. They are the ones most vocal about the next airport, ground services, weather, texture or shader replacements. If there is something in your library that can make that group happy, a tool, whatever, turn it into a product. (Balance the effort that has been necessary to make a texture replacement against your programming effort and think hard about that.)
• The flightsim market has diminished in the last 10 years, and quite substantially in the last 5. How many new companies have you seen emerge of the caliber of the ones you mentioned? How many have disappeared, how many shops closed - and don't forget Flight Sim World. Today, if you sell 1000 copies of anything, that is already to be considered a success.
• If a (any) product is successful these days is mostly determined by its impact on the "online community". Get one of the big influencers to recommend your product and it will fly, no matter how crappy or easy to make it is. 

There have been many posts like yours over the years (my own included) and the patterns and reasoning are always the same. But at some point we have to face facts, and invest our skills into more profitable things. Or accept that we are primarily doing this for ourselves. There is a very good chance that nobody except you will ever appreciate the complexity and ingenuity of your implementation. At that point I decided that I can just as well make freeware. Sure, one or two of those projects could be viable payware - but what's the point when they can't even recover development cost and I already know that I can't support them as payware should be supported?

Best regards

 

Edited May 18, 2019 by Lorby_SI

[Lewis Bloomfield 6]

Hey Otmar fire me a message on discord (I'm on skylounge) and lets see if we cant get that wiper support added for you.

[lownslo 592]

28 minutes ago, Lewis Bloomfield said:

Hey Otmar fire me a message on discord (I'm on skylounge) and lets see if we cant get that wiper support added for you.

You go Lewis!! 🥂

Greg

[John_Cillis 2,406]

So I took the plunge and installed this product, and all my bravado was for naught, the product is way advanced for something 'in development" and I have tried to grace the screenshots forum with some pictures.  For those who like systems management, all the systems of the aircraft are amazingly workable, things I would not expect in P3D, and not at any cost to fps or sim performance, and my specs, though once strong, are modest by today's standards, and I do not Turboboost my cpu per a recommendation Jim Young made recently, which has made a marked difference on smoothness in P3DV4.x and it saves the cpu, fewer overall cycles, and it keeps my apartment a tad cooler, lol.

The Vega is more than nostalgia, I find it a relaxing hand flyer, once the startup steps are complete and it is in the air, the drone of the engine is almost hypnotic, lulling one to sleep almost.  I can only imagine what airline transport in this aircraft, or an aircraft like the Ford Trimotor (I found a great payware Trimotor for Xplane11 but cannot remember the vendor), was like.  I love the pull handles in the Vega's cabin, seatbelts of the day, as it were.  These old aircraft enabled the jet age we live in today, and really we have lived in several jet ages as jet and propjet airline transport has advanced since the 707 and DeHavilland Comet.  

I remember my parents making me dress up in my Sunday best when I flew in the 60's, nowadays when I fly, since I no longer fly on business, I am in jeans and a nice polo shirt, and comfy slip on shoes, loose clothes as they suggest for flying.  I was in pain as a business traveler because I initially worked under IBM's umbrella, and they required us on travel days to wear suits and ties, and I had some long hauls.  I'd pick ties that were subtle but colorful, to express my personality as a teacher. 

That is what aircraft like the Vega bring back to me, memories of travel of old, the euphoria of going somewhere I had never been before, like Jim Kirk and the Star Trek crew, but on just a small global or national scale, or in the case of my first flights in the 60's, just back and forth between SF Bay and the LA Basin, because my Mom, brothers and I lived temporarily in Burbank from '66-67 while my father started his job as a health physicist at Mare Island Vallejo, so we had to fly up to see him or once or twice, he'd fly down to see us.

I was raised by my mother, my father traveled thru my childhood into my teens, I guess that is why I followed in his footsteps and became a business systems traveler and such a proponent of flying, as he was.  He even wanted to buy a Cessna 337 and we took a brochure home, but he decided the flight lessons in addition to learning his job would result in brain burnout, so he decided against it and I was the one in the family who realized the dream of at least flying a real life aircraft.

Hats off to the creator of this bird, aircraft like this, especially because my first flight was on a Lockheed Electra four engined PSA turboprop in '66, and  I oft flew on Lockheed L1011's, my last flight being some months before I met my fiance, from St. Louis to SFO, in '94....  Thanks for this Lockheed thread and helping us old Lockheed word not allowed reminisce...

John

[n4gix 4,947]

Otmar, I've watched you build this marvelous recreation of the Lockheed Vega for the past few years and have to admire your persistence in bringing it close to absolute perfection! Kudos man!