I have no actual knowledge here, just speculating, but maybe it's currently difficult for a 3rd party publisher to produce a study-level plane because they have to get the validated parameters from the aircraft manufacturers and elsewhere and then they have to "battle" the old FSX engine to implement those parameters. Every work around they have to implement in order to get the FSX engine to do what it was not initially designed to do takes time and effort.

However, with the current development team, they have official collaborations with the aircraft manufacturers so can get the information from the horse's mouth. And perhaps they've thought about this and designed the game engine from the ground up (as indeed they have) to make implementation of the data much easier. If it's actually much easier (quicker, less manpower) to create study-level aircraft, it's not unreasonable to believe them when they say that's what they are doing.

15 minutes ago, Superdelphinus said:

I agree. Maybe I’m mad, but I think the sort of developers that end up working for companies like Asobo and Microsoft are probably a lot more talented, and certainly have massively more resources, than those at small places like pmdg. 

This so much ! Pmdg is an ant compared to a mountain that is Microsoft when it comes to resources. They can hire way better developers and give them an insane amount of information from the sources they have. I mean now they are partnering with Boeing and have pilots validation the flight model. Just fantastic. Hearing that they dont want us to spend more speaks volumes on how committed they are not that we needed anymore assurance. 

We need more MS Cap Dude

My main takeaway from this is ATC. Given the OP said it's just not in the current build, it seems possible it might actually be there on day one at release, which would be huge in my book.

It's kind of crazy to think all of this has been going on for 5 years with none of us having a clue about what's going to unfold on us. @domkle Talk about earthquakes...

39 minutes ago, MatthewS said:

ROTFL....Sorry, but you can't  convince me that a default aircraft will be "study level" like PMDG.   Maybe go purchase a PMDG aircraft so you understand what "study level" actually means.

Falcon 3.0, 4.0, BMS, Study Level, DCS Study Level, Freaking Jane's Longbow 1 and 2 Study Level, out of the box. Not one PMDG in my Hangar. I can't justify an enormous expense for something that should be in the box. This is what a lot of simmers I know don't like about the PMDG click.

30 minutes ago, Baber20 said:

This so much ! Pmdg is an ant compared to a mountain that is Microsoft when it comes to resources. They can hire way better developers and give them an insane amount of information from the sources they have. I mean now they are partnering with Boeing and have pilots validation the flight model. Just fantastic. Hearing that they dont want us to spend more speaks volumes on how committed they are not that we needed anymore assurance. 

Hmmm.... they are partnering with Airbus too (the European in me waving his little flag ). 

Edited November 15, 20196 yr by domkle

22 minutes ago, Keyholebud said:

I can't justify an enormous expense for something that should be in the box.

I agree with that principle, but I would say it rather refers to things like ATC, weather engines, scenery, etc. This is what should be included in the box. Aircraft (and detailed airports) are actually one of the few things which make sense as addons and should always be there, regardless of how much manpower Asobo and Microsoft are throwing at the sim. There just won't be a broad variety of highly detailed aircraft without additional input from the likes of PMDG and others, imo.

Edited November 15, 20196 yr by threegreen

I would even say that a simple 200 mile trek old school VOR to VOR and DME in IFR in a 152 without GPS is study level. And making sure you have the fuel with changing winds and speeds, with an old slide rule and old metal flight computer is study level.

Look if you like PMDG awesome more power to ya but don't hammer the rest of us that don't "$buy$" into it. The fact that they are going all in on the new sim should excite us all.

I have hoped all along on the  MS Flight, DTG FSW, and others that we would finally see something New, Current. To my dismay they crashed and burned. But I still hope. What I am seeing, Hearing, I certainly hope this time too the new Sim is something that we all want and will get. Something new that will run good on al of our new rigs.

I have built 7 Rigs since 2006 (FSX) and many more before that. It seems to me a lot of people are shooting it down before its done. Maybe call me a word not allowed. I would rather be called a Hope for the best boy.

Edited November 15, 20196 yr by Keyholebud

19 minutes ago, threegreen said:

There just won't be a broad variety of highly detailed aircraft without additional input from the likes of PMDG, imo.

I agree, that's why I stated if they stick with the 737, it will be a good offering to the simmers that want to add to their hangar. DCS was hard to deal with, but if you want the plane's you got to buy them. But their platform is what it is. With that said, DCS 2.5 is free with a fairly high level AC with it. The 79.00 price tag for some of the planes hurt a little, but 139.00 for a PMDG. But its kind of apple to oranges. The new MSFS I hope will be good. Bring more people to our hobby.

 

 

Edited November 15, 20196 yr by Keyholebud

3 hours ago, Duncan Odgers said:

if you extend the flaps expect the nose to pitch up

Not all aircraft exhibit this behaviour - try it in a long body Mooney and you will be pumping in plenty of nose up trim.

Just wanted to correct the misconception that all aircraft behave like this.

8 minutes ago, DavidP said:

Not all aircraft exhibit this behaviour - try it in a long body Mooney and you will be pumping in plenty of nose up trim.

Just wanted to correct the misconception that all aircraft behave like this.

But I think they would know that as they are saying the planes are tested by real pilots. Also they are partenering with the aircraft manufacturers and probably receiving all the information they need to model things accurately.

If they want to deliver good aircrafts, they will hear the pilots’ feedbacks and adjust/tweak possible misbehaviors.

Edited November 15, 20196 yr by ca_metal

Thank you OP for your feedback!

I think we can agree things might be different from the default planes of a simulator which is now 13 years old. There is plenty of room between FSX default and what they can achieve, XP11 default planes are a decent example of making something look realistic while not being difficult.

You said there is full AI traffic from the get go. Can you confirm that there were or will be real airliners acting as the AI, or will that come in an add-on?

Why hasn't anyone who has played the demo hit Shift+Z yet????

55 minutes ago, SterlingCrimson92 said:

You said there is full AI traffic from the get go. Can you confirm that there were or will be real airliners acting as the AI, or will that come in an add-on?

Most certainly no real airlines. License issue.