Sign in to follow this  
Guest Shalomar

New products survey

Recommended Posts

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!When FLY 2 was in development they did a survey on what aircraft were most wanted. They were surprised when the most desired aircraft was one they had never heard of, our beloved PCXII. Wayne Roberts revived the tradition with scenery requests. I propose developers reveal what products they are CONSIDERING developing. Fly 2 users would have a chance to make them their first, second or third choice. For example:1: Specific to type cockpit for Robert Vigetti's Piagio Avanti2: Grumman Turbo Albatross with IFR capable avionics suite.3: Ficticious Naval Medevac Hawker TR800 with inflight refueling probe and arresting gearI'm not trying to limit creativity but help ensure that demand is created and efforts are not wasted. It takes a lot of time and effort to create a complete aircraft for FLY 2. A survey would reveal if people really want a plane that has a performance envelope very close to already available aircraft or something radically different. It would also reveal whether new products or enhancements (like type-specific panels) for existing aircraft are desired. I heard not many people responded to Wayne's survey. Maybe cuz it keeps disapearing. Maybe anchored threads for products development and scenery surveys? A FLY end-users survey forum? Just tossing a pebble in the water.Best regards and THANX for your efforts:-wave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

F2fdesign was hosting the scenery survey, but I don't think it is still there. No there were not a lot of people responding.I develop scenery for a certain area and see how many will download. If there is an interest I will continue to develop in that area.Not sure how people decide on what aircraft to develop. I like the business jets, but that is just me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Don(ny),the very deplorable truth is that there are only a few FLY!ers left and the number decreases from year to year. In 2004 I lost the last German FLY!-friends - we are still in contact but they are now busy with the X-Sim.So there is no big chance that MANY people respond to a survey. And many of those who are left are active with different FLY! projects and do not have much spare-time for other things.The only solution not to get frustrated over that is to put much energy and time in projects you personally are interested in - then it is not very important how many downloads you'll have.I work on my LS7 project with this special view and I created FLY!Tweaker because I was tired do all that FLY! editing work by hand (repeatedly). (There will be a new version on AVSIM at the end of this week).Let us enjoy all these new sceneries and development FLY!ers still do. I I look into this Forum every day as I like all the NICE, FRIENDLY and HELPFUL people right here :-). It is always inspiring and some sort of GLUE keeping me FLY!ing.RegardsGeorg HeliFLYer EDDW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

G'day Donny,< I'm not trying to limit creativity but help ensure that demand is created and efforts are not wasted.>I think George has the right idea. If one is to develop anything for Fly! II it must be something the individual has an interest in. Whether or not it gains many downloads in the Library if of little consequence to me. I wouldn't consider it "wasted effort". I would suggest that self satisfaction is the driving force that keeps people developing. Developers develop because they enjoy it; not because someone is patting them on the back singing "for he's a jolly good fellow".I'm currently making another aircraft that I doubt if anyone would have much interest in (certainly wouldn't rank in the top 200 if a survey was carried out); first jet aircraft to Fly across the atlantic; first jet aircraft to land on a carrier and also at one stage a variation of this aircraft held the altitude record for an aircraft.As hobbyists we all have different needs and aspirations. When these are not met by others we take a deep breath and take the plunge and start developing ourselves. :-)Fly! II is an outstanding sim to produce for. The file structure is really quite unique, and the deeper one goes, the more the logic and beauty of the structure becomes apparent.Cheers,Roger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wayne,As I promised, I am working on a list for some more U.S. airporst I would certainly like to see. If the link at F2F is gone, shall I post them here? :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roger, I like the idea of another jet aircraft.Randall, I will send you an email with my email where you can send the list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!Long range carrier jets are cool.Crazy idea: Can an aircraft carrier BE an aircraft? that would get around development issues like models can't move and vehicles are "soft" so they can't be landed on. FLY 2 might treat it as a really big, heavy floatplane without enough lift to get off the water. FLY 2 seems to accurately model the angles of collision. You can do a "touch and go" on a flat hangar roof but if you smack into a wall you're a crispy critter. Maybe the cockpit/bridge could be interfaced so a "pilot" could log on to Vatsim or IVAO as a controller with functioning radar.I'm studying up to do panel revisions for the Otter. If that works a modified Hawker panel for the Avanti. Pilatus EFIS with the control head where you don't have to sroll for heading changes and B200 engine instruments. I might try to put stock guages/switches close to where they are in real life without going too crazy. For my own use till I track down original authors. hey Wayne (and crew) check this out!!!http://www.airandspacemagazine.com/ASM/Web.../QT/Beriev.htmlI can't figure out how to transfer them but there are better pics in easyed's post "speaking of jets" in the Bush Flying Unlimited General discussion Forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this