So many airports, so few aircrafts......

[flyforever 267]

I can see why making airports is more profitable than making aircrafts. The developer who comes up with an aircraft and panel builder like Abacus( if ever possible) like we had in the old days will definitely find a large, hungry market.

[sd_flyer 6,042]

This is true I wish there were more aircraft. At the same time I don’t want to see anything like abacus Lol But more like A2A, Milviz, FSLabs and etc 

 

[Chock 17,769]

25 minutes ago, sd_flyer said:

At the same time I don’t want to see anything like abacus

Nah, Abacus' FSDS is great, an updated version of it for MSFS which could streamline the production process and make creating aeroplanes and scenery etc would be good.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Chock

[aniiran 431]

It's not about profit.  The reason we are getting airports is because they are relatively easy to convert from P3DV5 versions. Airplanes can be converted exterior model wise but the virtual cockpit dispalys as I understand it will not work in anyway in MSFS, they have to be created/modeled/programmed from scratch.

[jpe828 624]

I am growing impatient too lol. I just want a couple study level GA airplanes! I basically stick to the steam guage 172, sometimes the WT Citation. But I crave a more complex model! Hopefully the Just Flight Arrow is decent. 

[Glenn Fitzpatrick 3,798]

The one or two developers brave enough to risk importing an aircraft with the current SDK are coping  a lot of flak due to FM issues they are incapable of fixing.

Remember that the third party developer teams are mainly talented graphic artists that in the past relied on the game to get most of the aerodynamics right which they then tweaked.  In MSFS a straight import seems to barely fly and needs someone with a good background to get them to even fly in a basic fashion.

 

Meanwhile older airports import fine and new ones using the new tools look amazing.

[AirlinePilot83 86]

55 minutes ago, aniiran said:

It's not about profit.  The reason we are getting airports is because they are relatively easy to convert from P3DV5 versions. Airplanes can be converted exterior model wise but the virtual cockpit displays as I understand it will not work in anyway in MSFS, they have to be created/modeled/programmed from scratch.

This is pretty much the reason why we will have a long wait before study-level aircraft are available on this sim

[Ricardo41 5,949]

Title of this thread is misleading. There are plenty of aircrafts in the base sim. In addition, the modded TBM 930, the modded Longitude are approaching payware quality. 

The WT CJ4 is already at payware quality and close to "study-level".

[AnkH 2,264]

20 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

Title of this thread is misleading. There are plenty of aircrafts in the base sim. In addition, the modded TBM 930, the modded Longitude are approaching payware quality. 

Of course in pure numbers, the title of the thread is spot on... just check flightsim.to and compare the numbers of scenery vs. aircraft addons, even if you count in the Carenado planes the number is pretty small... Then, calling community modded default aircraft in the list of "addon" aircrafts might be suitable for the marketing departement of MS/Asobo, but is rather ridiculous, no? 

[jpe828 624]

38 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

Title of this thread is misleading. There are plenty of aircrafts in the base sim. In addition, the modded TBM 930, the modded Longitude are approaching payware quality. 

The WT CJ4 is already at payware quality and close to "study-level".

I am sorry... but the TBM close to payware... not even close! No fault to the modders, but the Turboprop logic in the sim is not close to correct... including the engine and the prop physics etc. The g3000 even with the WT mod is still lacking.. and the mod is a frame hog. 

The CJ4 is quite good, and I agree is getting to study level depth. 

[Chalm 4]

They will come in time, but my worry is older aircraft will be left in the dust. I would really like some steam gauge airliners like 727, DC9, L1011. I'd be happy with "usable" cockpits not study level.

[FPStewy 538]

2 hours ago, jpe828 said:

I am growing impatient too lol. I just want a couple study level GA airplanes! I basically stick to the steam guage 172

Until Asobo "opens up" it's not going to happen anytime soon, and let's just say that it's not the developers fault.

Decisions have to be made, as a serious simmer I'm flying study level aircraft and realizing that I kinda like that better than eye candy.

[sanh 823]

1 hour ago, FPStewy said:

Until Asobo "opens up" it's not going to happen anytime soon, and let's just say that it's not the developers fault.

I am not sure it needs opening. Based on comments from Aerosoft, Microsoft and the state of the default planes and the mod teams - it looks most of what is needed to make a complex aircraft is already there. Not everything but most. I think the main issue is the different way of building planes in MSFS.

I think its more the case that older sim devs don't want to recode large parts of their aircraft again from scratch and therefore want Asobo to add a compatibility layer so P3d aircraft can be ported more easily.

Edited January 25, 2021 by sanh

[wim123 763]

impatient people at it again.

it takes a lot more work and knowledge to make an aircraft, its that simple.

good study aircraft were not available asap for fsx.

[Car147 2,278]

We're 5 mths since launch! what do you expect, considering it took years for the previous sims to get anything resembling " Study Level" aircraft.... but hey,  alot seem to forget that.

I on the other hand think with the likes of FBW, WT, and others, this sim is going to be the best ever given time... Patience, patience!

Edited January 25, 2021 by Car147