A2A Update

[jpe828 624]

2 hours ago, marsman2020 said:

I'm sure A2As products are awesome but I don't know if I'll want to buy another aircraft so similar to the JF Arrow....

Yeah, I held out on the arrow. Too slow! So I am glad the Comanche is coming. Faster, higher altitude cruising, looks better, and more system depth from A2A... I am stoked.

[Bert Pieke 7,584]

3 hours ago, Lynchie said:

Personally I'm really looking forward to a Beaver or Twotter.

Beaver, please!

[mjw25 42]

I am with Bert.....

[Dominique_K 10,133]

A2A seems to be mostly adapting their products to MFS and they do not have released ever a Beaver or Twin Otter. A new product could be the Aerostar. They have done some work on a Texan 2 if am not mistaken for the USAF but didn't release it to the public.

Now, they know that it is dangerous to reveal a product too early on this market. So a surprise is always possible. 

[rayharris108 259]

Milviz B350i

[marsman2020 1,310]

1 hour ago, Dominique_K said:

They have done some work on a Texan 2 if am not mistaken for the USAF but didn't release it to the public.

I suspect releasing to the public anything related to an aircraft that was modeled for an official military simulation customer might be very difficult based on comments MilViz made in their Twitch stream a few months back.

There are issues related to export control and intellectual property, so once a given team has seen that restricted information I would imagine it becomes difficult to get "the powers that be" to sign off on a public version of the same aircraft.

[Ixoye 1,813]

The A2A Comanche 250 is the aircraft I want most of all in MSFS.

[Chock 17,769]

52 minutes ago, marsman2020 said:

I suspect releasing to the public anything related to an aircraft that was modeled for an official military simulation customer might be very difficult based on comments MilViz made in their Twitch stream a few months back.

There are issues related to export control and intellectual property, so once a given team has seen that restricted information I would imagine it becomes difficult to get "the powers that be" to sign off on a public version of the same aircraft.

Then again, that's down to the contract they draw up, which could also be written to include such a proviso.

I agree though that sometimes this litigious stuff can make for some odd strings; an example being the somewhat hilarious FSX-SE 'McDonnell Douglas DC-3' nomenclature from a few years back.

[Dominique_K 10,133]

1 hour ago, marsman2020 said:

I suspect releasing to the public anything related to an aircraft that was modeled for an official military simulation customer might be very difficult based on comments MilViz made in their Twitch stream a few months back.

 

You are probably right. But there is still a good side to it. A2A has done great things with the piston engine but couldn't do the same for the turbines. They say that working for the Texan 2 has given them the know-how. So we may have some turbo or jet propulsion coming from them one day.

 

[Tektolnes 184]

8 hours ago, marsman2020 said:

There are issues related to export control and intellectual property, so once a given team has seen that restricted information I would imagine it becomes difficult to get "the powers that be" to sign off on a public version of the same aircraft.

DCS + their 3rd party developers do it so it's not impossible by any means. Some companies are a bit more difficult to deal with than others - I think Textron are particularly tricky when it comes to licensing. But DCS has managed to secure rights to release the A-10C, F-16, F-18, F-14, Apache, AV-8B, M-2000, Huey, etc. and they have them modelled to a reasonable level of system depth. I'm not sure that compromises that a developer would have to make would even be relevant in the MSFS world which has no weapons, no real radar requirements, no ECM, etc. I'd think that getting a MSFS release would be easier in some respects.

[Air1 136]

I would just like to see their Cub with floats back for the current MSFS. I think that was like the first A2A aircraft release and the only one I own.

[Bobsk8 12,584]

13 hours ago, jpe828 said:

Yeah, I held out on the arrow. Too slow! So I am glad the Comanche is coming. Faster, higher altitude cruising, looks better, and more system depth from A2A... I am stoked.

I believe the Turbo Arrow which is being developed by JF will be faster than the Comanche. 

[Phantoms 800]

2 hours ago, Bobsk8 said:

I believe the Turbo Arrow which is being developed by JF will be faster than the Comanche. 

Bob, is the Turbo suppose to be faster than the non-turbo, Doesn't appear to really be in RL. Main advantage is altitude ability. So I guess you could say better performance (faster) at higher altitudes.

[Bobsk8 12,584]

31 minutes ago, Phantoms said:

Bob, is the Turbo suppose to be faster than the non-turbo, Doesn't appear to really be in RL. Main advantage is altitude ability. So I guess you could say better performance (faster) at higher altitudes.

https://www.risingup.com/planespecs/info/airplane423.shtml

[ryanbatc 12,819]

Looks like the turbo arrow would win above 14K ft or so.  Just looking at the airspeed indicators- they look very similar.