B727 FSS B727-200F Pre release review

[JBDB-MD80]

17 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

I'm genuinely curious what you were hoping to get out of this.

Maybe he wants a fully functional aircraft that he/she paid good "flightsim term" money for "early access" that the developer fell short on their words and promise after the release of a said product 1 1/2 years ago, perhaps. Early access did not set too well for this developer and gave a bad taste in some peoples mouth Heh? But lets keep the promised dreams alive on previous released products while spending our money on a new product from said developer while some of us don't fall for this behavior from developers and we are perceived as bad customers. That is not how this works.

[V1ROTA7E]

1 hour ago, Lucky38i said:

Yeah, very easy to say this, considering FSS has provided that internal insight. Like I said, I do wonder if you'd keep the same energy if you had this internal insight for any of the legacy devs, I'm guessing you'd also call them lacking in forsight for making choices that are deemed after the fact, poor choices?

lol. The difference is legacy devs wouldn’t try using default code in the first place, it’s a waste of time, resources, and money. Not quite sure what you’re defending here, the marketing was so over done by these guys for the ejets — not sure if you remember the long discussion filled with frustrated early adopters. Cash grabbing is the name of the game for MSFS2020. 

[Lucky38i]

41 minutes ago, JBDB-MD80 said:

Maybe he wants a fully functional aircraft that he/she paid good "flightsim term" money for "early access"

Then you've clearly misunderstood what the EA model is. I'm not sure the dev is to blame here, you took the risk to put funding to do this. I didn't cause I don't want an EA aircraft, but people had the freedom to do so and the risks involved with putting money forward with this endeavour. Now you're upset a product still in early access didn't pan out how you wanted it, despite it being literally EA from launch?

 

27 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

he difference is legacy devs wouldn’t try using default code in the first place, it’s a waste of time, resources, and money

Quite frankly you have no idea what devs do or don't do during development to attempt reinventing the wheel where not required. For example, for some devs the pre-existing fuel system that Asobo is fine for their needs, for others it isn't, however there's no way of ascertaining the level of fidelity default systems provides without first testing and demonstrating if it fits your needs or not. The only difference between FSS and various others devs is that you were told this information.

 

28 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

not sure if you remember the long discussion filled with frustrated early adopters

Oh I keenly remember people expectations were keenly different to what they understood would come out of an early access product. I did, and a good amount of others did and just chose not to take part. I'll pick up FSS's E-line when it looks like a state its ready, but I don't currently agree that it is.

 

30 minutes ago, V1ROTA7E said:

Cash grabbing is the name of the game for MSFS2020. 

No, FOMO is the name of the game for flight simmers in general, every trailer is filled with comments saying "Im gonna day one this!", "I'm gonna purchase this in hour one". With no sense of self-control to asses a product from reviews, description or purchase model for the given product. Then you're left with simmers all up in arms because they didn't want to bother even waiting a day or two for actual reviews an assesments to come out before purchasing a product. This is apparent since I've been simming since FS9 days and each and every time simmers don't learn then repeat the same mistakes. You could see from miles away the FSS E-line was not going to live up to expectations at launch but that didn't stop simmers from day one buying it.

It bears reminding many there very important things to look out for when you decide if you want to buy an early access product. This is taken from Steam but the rules can be easily applied in this situation

Quote

Then, there are a couple things you should consider before making your purchase:

What is the game like to play right now?

When you buy an Early Access game, you should consider what the game is like to play right now. Look at the screenshots and videos to see what the game looks like in its current state. There are a lot of ways a game can go as it develops over time, so if you aren't excited to play the game in its current state, then hold off and wait until the next update--it shouldn't be far off.

How often is this game getting updated?

Take a look at the recent update announcements from the developer (shown on the store page for that game) to get a sense of how active the developer is. Does it look like that game is getting updated a lot? Are they valuable and interesting updates?

Pricing of individual games may change over time

Some developers will start by offering a discount for buying early while others will charge a premium, depending on their goals and the level of commitment and feedback they desire from Early Access customers.

And most importantly

Quote

When will these games release?

Its up to the developer to determine when they are ready to 'release'. Some developers have a concrete deadline in mind, while others will get a better sense as the development of the game progresses. You should be aware that some teams will be unable to 'finish' their game. So you should only buy an Early Access game if you are excited about playing it in its current state.

In short, don't buy something for what it can be, but for what it is. If you're not ok with that, then DO NOT BUY.

[gunther]

Watched the video, looks good. But then I see it bouncing around on finals like a 152. Not what I'd expect from a 150,000 lb airplane, no matter how much PIO from that YTer.

[JBDB-MD80]

44 minutes ago, Lucky38i said:

In short, don't buy something for what it can be, but for what it is. If you're not ok with that, then DO NOT BUY.

Great suggestion. I will wait and see what FS Reborn is up to with their 727.

[Maxis]

1 hour ago, Lucky38i said:

And most importantly

In short, don't buy something for what it can be, but for what it is. If you're not ok with that, then DO NOT BUY.

"fluff deleted"

Probably the only thing i agree with you about regarding this thread. We are close to a new sim being launched and certain people are feeling burned .. they are entitled to feel that way and pretty much no explanation you can provide will satisfy them once their money is involved. I'm sure they were reasonably understanding when they purchased in the pre release model but after a certain amount of time goodwill is going to get used up. Early access doesn't mean the dev is off the hook and the timelines can now be arbitrarily stretched ad infinitum,, a complete product was promised after all.

Now, frankly i would NEVER join an early release from ANY developer as i believe in devs coming up with their own investment capital, seeing the development of the  product to completion and bringing that completed product to market but trying to explain away FSS seeming inability to complete what they set out to do .. especially in the manner that you are doing it ... is a bit much.

 

But lets get back to the discussion of FSS completed product. i guess.

Edited August 2 by Maxis

[Peter Z KCLE_EDDN]

1 hour ago, gunther said:

Watched the video, looks good. But then I see it bouncing around on finals like a 152. Not what I'd expect from a 150,000 lb airplane, no matter how much PIO from that YTer.

Absolutely agreed. I’m surprised V1 didn’t say anything about that, unless I missed it.

[sloppysmusic]

5 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

FOMO is the name of the game for flight simmers in general,

 Disagree with that rather huge generalisation. Substitute 'flight simmers in general' out for 'the premium target demographic of MSFS 2020/2024' and I'll agree.

There are flight simmers (disconnect phone, take a cold one from the fridge, sit back and enjoy plotting a route while the IRS aligns) and flight simmers (I'm a wna FLiGHt SimMer babeee! - look at my YouTube 1st thousand clicks gets a 1 one month free sub to Tube Titans mobile flight game woooo!).

Early access used to be called public open beta until some greedy bean counter (probably someone at corporate Activision/EA but don't quote me) figured people would be schmucks enough to PAY to test their products.

The SECOND you give them your money they no longer have any incentive to finish the product. This is the opposite of how the market is supposed to work IF you want guarantees and consumer rights. You have to agree in a EULA to NOT sue them or ask for refund BECAUSE you agree up front it's not the finished product.

Please...stop...feeding.....the .....gators. It gives them confidence to further populate our pond.

EDIT "Disconnect phone" - yes I'm THAT old!

 

Edited August 2 by sloppysmusic
laughed at myself

[Lucky38i]

53 minutes ago, sloppysmusic said:

There are flight simmers (disconnect phone, take a cold one from the fridge, sit back and enjoy plotting a route while the IRS aligns) and flight simmers (I'm a wna FLiGHt SimMer babeee! - look at my YouTube 1st thousand clicks gets a 1 one month free sub to Tube Titans mobile flight game woooo!).

Both crowds still make day one purchases. 

 

55 minutes ago, sloppysmusic said:

Early access used to be called public open beta until some greedy bean counter (probably someone at corporate Activision/EA but don't quote me) figured people would be schmucks enough to PAY to test their products.

Early access and open betas are distinctly different things. EAs can start at any point of the development process, whilst open beta is for feature complete products that are going through a round of testing. Funnily enough EA still does public open betas for their battlefield series. 

58 minutes ago, sloppysmusic said:

The SECOND you give them your money they no longer have any incentive to finish the product. This is the opposite of how the market is supposed to work IF you want guarantees and consumer rights. You have to agree in a EULA to NOT sue them or ask for refund BECAUSE you agree up front it's not the finished product.

Incentivization is the wrong word imo. I'd say legal obligation instead. There is a lot of whats considered GOATs that started out using the EA model(I mentioned some games previously). A lot of incentive came from buyers, despite it being EA. Cause when done with balance, can be rewarding to both the developers and EA adopters. 

On the topic of refunds, unlike the Steam storefront, most flight sim devs don't offer refunds to begin with or if they do its under really specific circumstances. Whereas Steam offers it point blank no questions asked under 2 hours and longer if you file a reasonable reason. 

Look I agree with some of your points wholeheartedly. Though the thing is the EA model is coming because there's a profitable majority that want it. The good thing is we as consumers have the choice to not buy into it and devs also have the choice to not use it as a pricing model. This is proven by FSS themselves releasing the 727 as a finished product.

[rick celik]

As others have mentioned there’s something wrong with the pitch / inertia, extremely noticeable on final. Surely the team have noticed that by now? 

[fsiscool]

8 hours ago, V1ROTA7E said:

not sure if you remember the long discussion filled with frustrated early adopters. Cash grabbing is the name of the game for MSFS2020. 

You are free to buy it as if the offering would not be under the EA model, aren't you? Simply wait the 1-2 years you would have to wait for a classic project and then buy it. You are absolutely free to do exactly that. It is your choice.

[Bigmack]

3 hours ago, sloppysmusic said:

 Disagree with that rather huge generalisation. Substitute 'flight simmers in general' out for 'the premium target demographic of MSFS 2020/2024' and I'll agree.

There are flight simmers (disconnect phone, take a cold one from the fridge, sit back and enjoy plotting a route while the IRS aligns) and flight simmers (I'm a wna FLiGHt SimMer babeee! - look at my YouTube 1st thousand clicks gets a 1 one month free sub to Tube Titans mobile flight game woooo!).

Early access used to be called public open beta until some greedy bean counter (probably someone at corporate Activision/EA but don't quote me) figured people would be schmucks enough to PAY to test their products.

The SECOND you give them your money they no longer have any incentive to finish the product. This is the opposite of how the market is supposed to work IF you want guarantees and consumer rights. You have to agree in a EULA to NOT sue them or ask for refund BECAUSE you agree up front it's not the finished product.

Please...stop...feeding.....the .....gators. It gives them confidence to further populate our pond.

EDIT "Disconnect phone" - yes I'm THAT old!

 

I don't mind paying for early access to a product while it's still being developed. I read the EULA and made the purchase because i understand trying to develop a product and get it to the market and circumstances change and an influx of money is needed to keep improvements going to a complete project. FSS has been upfront with what's going on with them, what more do you want. It not like Captain Sims selling you a shell and selling you more systems if you want to fill that shell. Or when Digital Aviation sold Folkers 70 and 100 with the promise of a VC and then disappeared once they sold an incomplete product. I support the hobby I love because for a long time after FSX this hobby almost went away. I'm glad it's growing and staying strong. Come on FS2024!!!!

[petejohno1]

1 hour ago, Bigmack said:

Or when Digital Aviation sold Folkers 70 and 100 with the promise of a VC and then disappeared once they sold an incomplete product.

I remember that one ! Probably the only time I got burned on an early release and a promise....

[Lord Farringdon]

3 hours ago, rick celik said:

As others have mentioned there’s something wrong with the pitch / inertia, extremely noticeable on final. Surely the team have noticed that by now? 

Both Avgeek and V1 were flying manually into high altitude gusty airfields and both were a bit behind the aircraft. In V1's case, he hadn't really set up a stable approach, had to S-turn his way in there and was initially high, then low. So there was a lot of exaggerated pitch going on here in both cases I think. That said, they both commented on the twitchy roll. To be fair there was one external view that did show a severe pitch that IRL would have been quite violent. Until we get out hands on it we won't really know what it's like on a stable approach. But if V1 thought the aeroplane was unstable in pitch I think he would have advised that if only to explain/troubleshoot the oscillations. So, I'm hopeful it's not too seriously wrong in pitch but the workload to keep ahead of the plane certainly seems to be about right!!  

I also felt V1's use of radials and DME for confirming nav position and airways intercepts while fundamental were a good demo of how radio nav is used in the absence of a magenta line for those new to this.

The overweight situation was of course a bit of 'fun' but I liked how given the situation he made appropriate considerations regarding flap settings, airfield air density and packs off conditions. I probably would have forgotten about the packs and speared off the runway even underweight!!  Not sure if the horses were too happy about their ears popping though on eventual climb out but that was least of their worries on this flight which had multiple departures and only one landing you could walk away from.  I loved it when the 'NTSB' offered up a Bank Angle donation LOL!!

Oh and the sounds. What did V1 say? "B727 sounds can never be too loud". Right on.

 

Altimeters

Once power is applied those altimeter vibrators go to work and they are incessant, like some sort of tropical insect. But at the same time it makes the airplane feel alive as opposed to a flying computer. Well modelled.

 

Nose Wheel

The nose wheel thumps are also very realistic. You are close to the ground and the nose gear is just behind you. You hear every noise that oleo makes. I couldn't quite pick it up in V1's presentation (probably because of all the howls and hoots when there was just the slightest possibility of a positive rate, and because most of the time the gear never had a chance to come up anyway LOL) but on a sharp rotate the oleo will drop with an audible thump. On a slow rotate this won't be heard as much with just the rumbling sound of the spinning nose wheels as the gear retracts followed by the spin down sound of the tire brakes as the nose gear fully retracts into the well. So it's good to see we have at least some nose gear sounds because they are very much a part of the B727 experience. I look forward to finding out more about this on release. 

 

Engines

It's a real world fact that the B727 was pushed out of commercial use due to increasing airport noise abatement issues. The P&W JT8D turbofan was derived from the JT-8 (civil) and J-52 (military) pure jet engines, the latter used in the Douglas A4 Skyhawk. Anyone who has heard an A4 on departure will know how loud they sound. The B727 essentially had three similar engines. Although hush kits and winglets were fitted to some to try to keep them on line a bit longer, fuel efficiency and the emergence of the B757 (come on Bluebird) was the final nail in the coffin for mainstream passenger services.  So it is a bit of shame the cascading reverse buckets are probably going to be left off in the release on 6 August in favour of what might be hush kits. I know our old -100 went to Africa with its buckets attached and operated there without hushkits as did a lot of the old 727's so this is disappointing indeed. They should offer an option here. But anyway, the engines were indeed noisy with the flight deck windows open (you wouldn't normally do that in practice except perhaps in a maintenance test) but quiet when in flight. The engines are a long way back and most of the noise on the flight deck is wind noise and those altimeters.  I think it was V1 that cautioned the lack of audible feedback from the engines so that checking EPR and regular engine instrument scanning was necessary to ensure correct throttle settings. I was also impressed with rumble in the flight deck on approach with the aircraft dirtied up. A dirtied up 727 has a lot things to induce that rumbling!

 

Cargo Bay/Passenger Cabin

V1 mentioned flap hydraulic noise during flap extension. IRL this and MLG noise is heard on pretty much most aircraft but not necessarily always modelled in MSFS so, pleased this is modelled. Obviously a stray hydraulic noise that was looping in the background there too so clearly a bug. I didn't hear any MLG noise but the reviewers didn't focus on this so it will be interesting to see what FSS has done in this regard. Finally, I was impressed with the whole main cargo door operation. The hydraulic whine, the slow speed,  the noise of the 'C' latches engaging, brought back my RW experience of operating the B727 main cargo door. 

I didn't see any of the baggage hold doors being operated, unless I missed it?  So, lot's of things still to look at once the aircraft is released including reviewers deep  dives into the nav systems. But boy, they've done a pretty good atmospheric job even if some others will be at pains to point out bugs here and there and try to bag the developer's credibility on this aircraft because of some past issues they have personally had with the company. But I think we have a fun package here that can meet most of the serious simmers requirements (with GPS if you need it), challenges us to understand 'old school' (if you don't want GPS), demands some airmanship to stay ahead of the airplane, some good opportunities for hands and feet flying the ILS in crappy weather (maybe even try some DME arcs), some good worn textures, a well represented and systems rich flight deck with a helpful EFB, and a realistic sound package. There will be worts of course and actual depth of systems and failures will be brought into question. These will be noticeable once we get our hands on the aircraft but this is not at PMDG/Fenix level, neither is it at that price. So I expect to get what I am prepared to pay for.  Hopefully there will be a paint kit out there and our hard working painters can impress us yet again with their exploits.   From Wiki: "For over a decade, more 727s were built per year than any other jet airliner; in 1984, production ended with 1,832 built and 1,831 delivered, the highest total for any jet airliner until the 737 surpassed it in the early 1990s".  So there should be plenty of liveries to choose from!!  

Cheers

Terry       

     

     

[eslader]

14 hours ago, Lucky38i said:

Then you've clearly misunderstood what the EA model is

Everyone understands what the EA model is, but when's the last time you saw that make any difference in any early access game? Even KSP which is probably the crown prince of EA success stories, had people chewing on HarvesteR almost from day 1 that the EA title they bought for $7 wasn't at gold release 3 days after they bought it. People want to pay for a Chevy Nova and drive home in a Bentley.

 

8 hours ago, sloppysmusic said:

The SECOND you give them your money they no longer have any incentive to finish the product.

That's true for contractors. If you're having a deck built make sure you don't give them more than half the money before it's done because then they don't have much incentive to prioritize you over customers who haven't paid them yet.

It's not really true for software development. Once the contractor builds your deck, they have to go off and build another for someone else. They can't just make endless copies of your deck and sit there raking in the cash. If the software developer wants money from the people who didn't buy into the EA period, they need to finish the software.

EA is a risk, but it's a known risk. You know going in the product may never be finished. If it turns out that the product doesn't get finished, then you know not to buy EA from that dev again.

The main thing I dislike about the modern-day EA model is that in the early days, you got the product at a steep discount. I paid $7 for Kerbal Space Program. I later went back and tipped them $20 because I felt like I robbed them, and the game was easily worth more than $27 when finished to boot.

Now we've got EA titles that are a significant percentage of the full release price, and that's ridiculous. Or, on the extreme end, you've got that stupid Chris Roberts ripoff where one of the EA packages is $48,000. That's not a typo. For a game that's been in "development" for a decade and shows no signs of ever going full release.