9 hours ago, jcomm said:

Regarding the BAe 146, after watching some youtubes I am tempted to buy the FS 2024 version. It looks like it adds some functionality, which is typical of the MSFS platform, and in some graphical aspects looks better than the Xp12 version.

 

The only "146" in v2024 at the moment is the Avro RJ, kind of like the younger twin brother of the 146: same airframe as 146 with slightly more powerful engines and a digital/semi-glass cockpit.

146 hasn't released for v2024 as yet, and in the meantime, I've been highly tempted by the RJ. It's a very good "mix" of technologies - you can fly it much like a 737-500 or Airbus A310.

On 6/1/2025 at 6:25 PM, UrgentSiesta said:

The only "146" in v2024 at the moment is the Avro RJ, kind of like the younger twin brother of the 146: same airframe as 146 with slightly more powerful engines and a digital/semi-glass cockpit.

146 hasn't released for v2024 as yet, and in the meantime, I've been highly tempted by the RJ. It's a very good "mix" of technologies - you can fly it much like a 737-500 or Airbus A310.

Hmmm...

Just Flight - Major update for our MSFS 146 Professional

11 hours ago, jcomm said:

Hmmm...

Just Flight - Major update for our MSFS 146 Professional

Came out before v2024.

Check the Compatibility on the product page, says 2020, where the Hawk, Arrows, and others specify both.

Now...it MIGHT work in v2024 as some other v2020 add-ons do, I just haven't wanted to take the chance or deal with whatever problems might arise.

Too many add-ons that do work to worry about this one until the v24 update comes out 😎

On 6/1/2025 at 2:33 PM, jcomm said:

Hmm, ok, thx for the explanation. Wonder who did the MSFS version then - and judging from the videos I've been watching, it surely has many elements, like the "EFB" that look a lot like those in the XP12 version (?) and that's why it made me think they had been developed by the same team.

Maybe a subcontracted dev of other MSFS add-ons. The two simulators are too different to do cross-development efficiently, especially for more complex aircraft. The 3D mesh and all textures (3D objects and EFB) can be used as a basis in both simms though, hence the similar art style.

 

On 6/1/2025 at 7:03 PM, UrgentSiesta said:

Oh, believe me, my "hopes" are low 😆

///

Thranda have released a Caravan, a PC-12, a 206, a 172 and a 337. All after doing those planes for Carenado (the 337 never came to XP, but Carenado have one).

It doesn't have to be an actual Carenado addon to constitute infringement since Thranda had access to Carenados code & graphics.

And to be perfectly clear, I'm not saying any IP was infringed (I have no idea whether or not...) and further, there may be a private agreement between Thranda and Carenado, since Carenado have  completely halted XP development.

Simply that there is a remarkable overlap in product lines that any lawyer would love to dig into.

Since Thranda is a professionally run business and intends to stay one (case in point: Dan's constant complaints about financial risks involved in updating the 146), they oughta know what infringement is and what isn't. If you want to check for yourself, you can always compare the meshing and texture UV layout of any two objects in Blender. If the vertices and faces of both align perfectly, you'd have a clear case of infringement. For everything else, like fmod, ACF and SASL scripts the waters are muddier as Thranda was the original author of it for the Carenado aircraft anyway and would have made extensive changes for their releases. Whether the decision to follow up with their own renditions was made before or after their contract termination with Carenado is a different matter and at worst one of violating a gentlemman's agreement.

 

P.S: In order to imagine which aircraft Thranda could develop, consider their dynamic panel system first and foremost. From that, consider aircraft that could run entirely on steam or on partial glass gauges. Then factor in some ruggedness or utility value and you should get an idea of what could or could not pop up in their portfolio. If you want 100% glass or anything larger than, say, a 30 seater, you will have to look for another developer.

Edited June 3, 20251 yr by Bjoern

40 minutes ago, Bjoern said:

Since Thranda is a professionally run business and intends to stay one (case in point: Dan's constant complaints about financial risks involved in updating the 146), they oughta know what infringement is and what isn't. If you want to check for yourself, you can always compare the meshing and texture UV layout of any two objects in Blender. If the vertices and faces of both align perfectly, you'd have a clear case of infringement. For everything else, like fmod, ACF and SASL scripts the waters are muddier as Thranda was the original author of it for the Carenado aircraft anyway and would have made extensive changes for their releases. Whether the decision to follow up with their own renditions was made before or after their contract termination with Carenado is a different matter and at worst one of violating a gentlemman's agreement.

You're jumping the gun a bit 🙂

I'd like to RE-clarify that I'm not implying ANY improper actions.

And yes, I'm passingly familiar with infringement 👍

The comments were simply about the fact that Thranda have been developing the very same aircraft types that Carenado previously did (NOT that they're copying Carenado's work).

And thence to the idea that Thranda thus already has experience with light jets and turboprop multis, and so on.

So, it'd be nice to see some of those same (or similar) aircraft types come to XP 12 thru Thranda. Esp since Carenado have apparently exited the XP market.

E.g., the PC-12 is literally a biz jet, so why not keep going with a Premier 1a or such...?

Edited June 3, 20251 yr by UrgentSiesta

21 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

E.g., the PC-12 is literally a biz jet, so why not keep going with a Premier 1a or such...?

Glass. I just can't see Thranda code an entire ProLine suite or even just a fraction of it. Besides, it would defeat their panel customization feature. As I've said: Steam and partial glass or bust. Something like an older Beechjet 400 variant or so would fit their bill if (and only if) they find an interest in jets (which they so far did not).

Something like the Twin Otter (huge market potential there!) or Shorts 330/360 would fit their bill perfectly.

2 hours ago, Bjoern said:

Glass. I just can't see Thranda code an entire ProLine suite or even just a fraction of it. Besides, it would defeat their panel customization feature. As I've said: Steam and partial glass or bust. Something like an older Beechjet 400 variant or so would fit their bill if (and only if) they find an interest in jets (which they so far did not).

Something like the Twin Otter (huge market potential there!) or Shorts 330/360 would fit their bill perfectly.

Good point.

And Twin Otter would be nice, as the existing v11 one seems to be stuck there... IIRC, it's by LES...?

BUT Thranda have been including the Laminar G1000 as an option in quite a few of their add-ons like Caravan and PC-12, and TBH, it's nice to have a "standardized" glass cockpit, esp the G1000 with the moving map and such.

IDK...they make good stuff, and have done good stuff for both JF and Carenado. Especially JF, whereas IIRC, Carenado was mostly focused on Min Viable Product conversions for XP.

Would like to see Theanda carry forward with some other aircraft that are still "GA", but reasonably larger/more complex.

The PC-12 was is a great next step, and I'm liking it so far. And as long as whatever's next also has an optional G1000 like they've been including, I'll probably buy it. 🤙

22 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

And Twin Otter would be nice, as the existing v11 one seems to be stuck there... IIRC, it's by LES...?

No, RW Designs. There's an unofficial patch for it, but caution should be exercised as the aircraft was last officially updated 7(!) years ago.

 

22 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

BUT Thranda have been including the Laminar G1000 as an option in quite a few of their add-ons like Caravan and PC-12, and TBH, it's nice to have a "standardized" glass cockpit, esp the G1000 with the moving map and such.

Didn't know they supported that. My last and only original Thranda product was the Beaver for XP11.

 

22 hours ago, UrgentSiesta said:

IDK...they make good stuff, and have done good stuff for both JF and Carenado. Especially JF, whereas IIRC, Carenado was mostly focused on Min Viable Product conversions for XP.

Can't speak for the Fokker 50, but the Saab 340 was anything but minimum viable. If not for some limitations inherited from its XP11 genesis, it still holds up really well.

 

 

Edited June 5, 20251 yr by Bjoern