47 minutes ago, Ricardo41 said:

Blackboxsimulation, is this you?

Hard to say....but if so, he must be planning on bringing the A330 he never finished for P3d into MSFS, marketing it as a "Pro-Prologue" edition, promising upon release of v.88 (.01 up from the P3d v.87 as he had to convert the model), that Antony will be hard at work updating it to .v90....a task he's been on for several years now with the P3d version.🤣

He should stick with his small GA planes, he has no business selling airliners since he never seems to finish them.

Maybe something BIG is coming?

...or a Convair Meteropolitan!!! 

An I am in heaven... 😊😁😀

1 hour ago, omarsmak30 said:

Developer comment here: https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/study-level-airliner-hype/417613/106 . So it seems a new developer that is getting into high fidelity airliners business. Looking forward to see what is the new blood has for us 🙂

For those that are too lazy to go to the flighsimulator.com forum, here is the quote from Aamir, who is supposedly the lead developer of this project:

Quote

Hey guys - I’m the lead on the project you’re all talking about.

First off, I’m really happy to see loads of skepticism - rightly so. I hope that, in short order, when we lift the covers, many of you will be pleasantly surprised.

We’ve worked very hard in silence for quite some time - and we are only a few days from showing our project off to the world - whilst I wish I could just drop some screenshots and announce it, the team has worked far too hard at what’s under the skin of this airplane for some screenshots and a quick announcement to do this justice. Just bear with us for a short while whilst we prepare.

In the meantime, to answer some of the questions on here -

No, it does not use (or reuse) any code from the default airplanes. It is fully, and absolutely custom. From the ground up. All of it.

Yes, there are failures. 170 of them at last count.

Yes, we are relative unknowns. We will have to work extremely hard to gain your trust. I hope in due course you can see some of the incredible effort we’ve put in to this airplane - and what a labor of love it has been.

Thanks,
Aamir

 

Edited July 8, 20214 yr by abrams_tank

1 hour ago, Peter Webber said:

Come on guys. Don't you see the clue? "170 failures included". Embraer E170.

Although it is a stronger "clue" when its phrased that way "170 failures included" because that could be rephrased as "failures from a 170 included".. the developed did once again use the number 170 again...

 

22 minutes ago, abrams_tank said:

Yes, there are failures. 170 of them at last count.

 

Maybe I just like a good intrigue story, but I'm happy to imagine that these are intentionally dropped clues and go with E170 as my guess.   Well spotted Peter

Please developers, be original, maybe a firefighter?

1 hour ago, abrams_tank said:

Yes, we are relative unknowns. We will have to work extremely hard to gain your trust. I hope in due course you can see some of the incredible effort we’ve put in to this airplane - and what a labor of love it has been.

Sometimes I do really wonder why those guys, if so hard working and spending a lot of time, not also take some seconds to think and to realize that doing such a blunt "advertisment" trying to build up some suspense does NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING to gain the trust of potential future customers but rather drive them already crazy and letting get them an maybe overly critical and biased opinion...

I don't personally hold the idea that MSFS is ready for complex aircraft simulation.  Eye candy, to me, is not an adequate flight simulation experience.

If its an A220/C Series, I'll definitely bookmark it.

Ouroboros jets us already doing an E170.  They have a discord channel with lots of previews.  Wonder if this is separate?

14 minutes ago, speil said:

I don't personally hold the idea that MSFS is ready for complex aircraft simulation.  Eye candy, to me, is not an adequate flight simulation experience.

Excuse me be what is not so complex about the PMDG DC-6 and the 737 dropping later in the year,  must be living under a rock?

As for this new product anything Boeing I am down for.

Edited July 8, 20214 yr by jbdbow1970

15 minutes ago, speil said:

I don't personally hold the idea that MSFS is ready for complex aircraft simulation.  Eye candy, to me, is not an adequate flight simulation experience.

DC-6 is not complex enough for you? LOL 

I want to see flight school puppy mill Cessna 172 with 170 failures ! 🙂

15 minutes ago, speil said:

Eye candy, to me, is not an adequate flight simulation experience.

I'm not convinced many simmers share your point of view.

Kind regards, Michael

19 minutes ago, speil said:

I don't personally hold the idea that MSFS is ready for complex aircraft simulation.  Eye candy, to me, is not an adequate flight simulation experience.

What a ridiculous statement unless you haven't tried the PMDG DC6.