For FSL Concorde owners...

[cyyzrwy24 127]

10 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

The amount of chatter has dropped significantly. Either people are patient and putting up with the problems or they’re not flying Concorde. I have no idea which it is and if I do post something I fear Lefteris will shut discussion down.

Are you flying it? Seeing the same issues as me?

I think with delays they have I would say that people are getting more impatient on every aspect and including 320 series. Can't criticize much because I don't understand process and what is involved but for some reason it appears that there is no end in sight. People? Resources? Money? Who knows. But for them to be last on launch in MSFS that is surprising. Fenix got their product on line, not perfect but "close to" and as far as I can see eating their lunch. Will see what will happen. 

[Beardyman 604]

8 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Are you flying it? Seeing the same issues as me?

Right now i do not fly Concorde cause my computer is not that powerful as yours, and it seems that FSL need a lot of time to improve performance ( if ever ... )

Secondly - i simply cannot stand how badly this plane looks - the most beautiful plane ever created is done in such way that it is pain to look at her.

Regarding low forum activity - I think people gave up and waiting until FSL mercifully fix and improve things.

[ggerolamo 108]

2 hours ago, Beardyman said:

Right now i do not fly Concorde cause my computer is not that powerful as yours, and it seems that FSL need a lot of time to improve performance ( if ever ... )

Secondly - i simply cannot stand how badly this plane looks - the most beautiful plane ever created is done in such way that it is pain to look at her.

Regarding low forum activity - I think people gave up and waiting until FSL mercifully fix and improve things.

I can only agree with that! I bought the FSL Concorde on the first day (for the 2nd time by the way ;-))
But I am not at all enthusiastic about the outdated graphics, the 'obligated' copilot and especially the performance !
I didn't even feel like going through the tutorial flight!
That's why I never used the Concorde again (! Obviously nobody at FSL really cares about these problems !!!
For me: never again FSL !
This airplane in its current state (I don't think it will change that soon - if ever) is really not usable for me !
I think most others feel the same way - and gave up.....

regards
ggerolamo

[jcomm 5,940]

Well,

if not for other reasons, I have to thank you all who have posted your thoughts about this Concorde.

It used to be in my 2-buy list, but right now I have changed that to QW 787 and / or Majestic Q-400 Pilot Edition...

[Patco Lch 1,467]

I don’t have the Concord but it bothers me the way formally gold standard developers will release something then slowly abandon promised fixes to issues bought up by customers in their haste to plunge into the MS market. I fully understand the need to pursue the market but nevertheless when you’ve paid hard earned cash for something you have a right to except a fully developed product. A certain one I’m thinking of is actually years behind certain improvements and upgrades on multiple aircraft . If you have the sand to ask them about them you are told that’s pending behind their list of MSFS projects. It would be less of an insult to your intelligence if they would just say forget about it.

This isn’t a slam toward FS Labs by any means but a statement on the general market culture these days toward P3D users.

 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,989]

Each month I attend a flight sim meeting at a local village hall. The majority are using MSFS and rely on the wi-fi there to fly in it. A few use XP. No-one uses P3D. I used to take my old PC and fly 32-bit Concorde and it always attracted attention.

And each month I come away feeling no inclination whatsoever to buy MSFS. I have 3 red lines which remain and MSFS2024 shows no signs Microsoft / Asobo will change their attitude.

It's possible Concorde will look and perform better in MSFS but that's not enough to make me switch. It's a shame so many companies are being forced to switch to another sim just to survive. It must be incredibly difficult for them.

But it's switch or die I'm afraid. I am frustrated the bugs in Concorde haven't been fixed but I understand the dilemma FSL are in.

 

[Ray Proudfoot 8,989]

Keep on topic please. I've hidden a couple about another aircraft.

[Luis Hernandez 572]

58 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I have 3 red lines which remain

Historic WX is one of your red lines (if I understood you correctly), and I fully agree. Which are the other two?

Edited January 24 by Luis Hernandez

[Ray Proudfoot 8,989]

1 minute ago, Luis Hernandez said:

Historic WX is one of your red lines (if I understood you correctly), and I fully agree. Which are the other two?

Forced updates and access to the camera api so ChasePlane can be developed.

An orange line is loss of Radar Contact. The default ATC has always been awful and alternatives for MSFS hasn't shown a clear leader.

[jcomm 5,940]

My biggest red lines are weather modeling in terms of effects and feel of flight / flight dynamics, which still leave me with a lot to desire...

ATC wise I am more than fine with FSHUD, and it works both on p3d and MFS 😁

Edited January 24 by jcomm

[SimeonWilbury 220]

Thoughts from my end; many of these are similar to Ray:

Three best:

• The VCS is a very immersive experience, I prefer it over FS2Crew which I use for the other aircraft in my fleet.
• A challenge to fly but in a good way, I never get tired of the flight profile.
• The flight planning tools are intuitive and easy to use, plus the paper charts are gorgeous (and useful).

Three worst:

• Appalling Performance, especially with cockpit night lighting on. I routinely suffer from Poor FPS (especially at Heathrow).
• Eats VRAM for breakfast, I've done my best to limit usage but flying into newer sceneries like T2G CDG is dicey at best, 8GB card is definitely the 'minimum' and not optimum.
• Still a few bugs and some features still need fleshing out, new features for the P3D version seem to be on hold while FSL develops the MSFS version.

Edited January 30 by SimeonWilbury

[DD_Arthur 1,068]

On 1/24/2024 at 11:06 AM, Patco Lch said:

in their haste to plunge into the MS market. 

Hardly something FSLabs can be accused of.

Their forum really is a curious animal. Most developer boards are set up to promote and support their products.

Yet the gentlemen of FSLabs seem to prefer to actively discourage discussion.

 I do wonder how they’ll fair in the rather more knockabout, raucous world of MSFS.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,989]

I’ve reported odd things with the accel point calculation and the docs showed two of them in a plan. Reported on Sunday but the only response was a request for the plan.

Then yesterday on a flight from Hong Kong to Tokyo the HP200 reported unrestricted climb. But I still heard a countdown to accel. Problem was I was at Mach 1.3.

I do wonder how all this was missed by the testers. Of course I daren’t suggest that over there or I’d be jumped on by the main man.

Agree that performance is poor and even with my kit I have to dial back Ai at Heathrow to keep the fps in the mid 20s.

[newtie 533]

Must be a sign of the times...being hesitant to ask for support for a product you've paid for.

[Ray Proudfoot 8,989]

33 minutes ago, newtie said:

Must be a sign of the times...being hesitant to ask for support for a product you've paid for.

I don’t understand them. I’m not asking for an immediate fix because, disappointingly, they’ve switched to MSFS. But surely a lot of code will be common so fixing bugs in the P3D version means it will be fixed for the MSFS one.

An acknowledgment would help. Discussion has more or less ceased over there just five months after release.