Majestic still cares about their loyal customers !

[micstatic]

45 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

Running outside the sim isn’t the issue, sure you can do whatever you want outside the sim (well not really but more), it’s the communications with the sim where the accuracy is lost.  Try it and see for yourself.

this makes zero sense.  You said that high resolution controls is not possible with msfs and majestic.  Defend your position. 

[CO2Neutral]

20 hours ago, micstatic said:

You said that high resolution controls is not possible with msfs and majestic

I thought I did make it clear, perhaps you are not familiar with both P3D SDK/PDK and MSFS SDK?

MSFS SDK just doesn’t support 125Hz … the input results are interpolated (lower sampling).  Show me where in the MSFS SDK it does support 125Hz?

That is not the only issue, C++ gauges are still missing functionality that MJC Q400 requires.  If you want the exact details then contact Oleksiy Frolov, I’m sure you must have his email (I do) if you claim this makes “zero sense”.

[micstatic]

8 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

I thought I did make it clear, perhaps you are not familiar with both P3D SDK/PDK and MSFS SDK?

MSFS SDK just doesn’t support 125Hz … the input results are interpolated (lower sampling).  Show me where in the MSFS SDK it does support 125Hz?

That is not the only issue, C++ gauges are still missing functionality that MJC Q400 requires.  If you want the exact details then contact Oleksiy Frolov, I’m sure you must have his email (I do) if you claim this makes “zero sense”.

PMDG has managed to get C++ gauges functioning.  Even if at a slow rate.  If what you say is true about the SDK we shall see.  I'm not a developer and have had no need to directly read SDK of any simulator.  I can tell you I've been very satisfied flying planes like the maddog, pmdg, and others in MSFS that I also enjoyed in p3d.  Even not at 125hz.  I use inputs with hall sensors and have never found control input accuracy to be an issue.  Especially when using tools like spad.next.  What I do know is the marriage of that plane and the other simulator will be a beautiful thing.  But we wait.  

[CO2Neutral]

Sure I hope MJC Q400 makes it to MSFS also … it’s a shame so many MSFS users think the MSFS SDK is sufficient when it’s not but then blame the developer for releasing compromised solutions.  Even 4+ years later, MJC get the blame for “being slow” when the ball is squarely in Asobo/Microsoft’s court for a more flexible SDK.

As we all know, the MJC was an incredibly efficient (FPS performance wise) aircraft in P3D and much of that was due to C++ features that aren’t being supported in MSFS SDK.

[micstatic]

I seem to recall majestic blaming losing their modeler not the sdk for their issues 

[CO2Neutral]

On 3/14/2025 at 2:55 AM, micstatic said:

I seem to recall majestic blaming losing their modeler not the sdk for their issues 

How do you lose a 3D modeler?  They’re paid contractors most of them and there are many with varying costs.

[micstatic]

2 hours ago, CO2Neutral said:

How do you lose a 3D modeler?  They’re paid contractors most of them and there are many with varying costs.

His latest comment in February was below.  Prior to that comment, they had previously said that their modeler was effected by the war in Ukraine. 

[CO2Neutral]

Yes, there are some excellent (and more affordable) 3D modelers in the Ukraine (and other EU candidate countries).  Portugal has a pretty good community of 3D modelers also … so they may have lost their preferred modeler, but there are plenty available for contract (it’s not a hold up unless it is simply a matter of cost that can tip the ROI to be less attractive).

But I do hope it shows up eventually without compromises as I’m not a fan of giving up features that were supported 10 years ago but not in MSFS … visuals improvements aren’t enough for me buy an MJC Q400 MSFS version, needs to bring at least the same level of accuracy and functionality to MSFS.

[micstatic]

I'm pretty sure neither of us work for majestic or a flight sim aircraft manufacturer.  I was just relaying the facts and not making assumptions...

[ATRguy]

Who’s giving up features and accuracy bringing stuff over to MSFS? 

[CO2Neutral]

21 hours ago, micstatic said:

I'm pretty sure neither of us work for majestic or a flight sim aircraft manufacturer.  I was just relaying the facts and not making assumptions...

Is that an assumption?  Sorry, I’m not at liberty to discuss who I’ve worked with in this environment.

17 hours ago, ATRguy said:

Who’s giving up features and accuracy bringing stuff over to MSFS?

Sorry, this sounds like another lead-in to X vs. Y or blame the developer.

[micstatic]

22 minutes ago, CO2Neutral said:

Is that an assumption?  Sorry, I’m not at liberty to discuss who I’ve worked with in this environment.

perhaps it is an assumption.  But when you stated their reason for not getting to MSFS yet was the SDK when I presented the actual reason (Stated by the dev) I assumed you were on the outside.  

[CO2Neutral]

https://msfsaddons.com/2025/03/22/pmdg-begins-777-testing-in-msfs-2024/

Robert’s challenges with the SDK.  It’s not just me … theme is consistent.  Like I said, end users keep barking up the wrong tree for fundamental solutions to a broken and limited SDK.

Blame Asobo not 3rd party.