Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,023 Excellent

1 Follower

About kingm56

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

Recent Profile Visitors

4,457 profile views
  1. You made assumptions that are inaccurate. I am a developer and my market data supports PMDGs, aerosofts, etc comments. Everything I stated is factually accurate. Why are you so overly emotional on this subject? The emotion is not necessary as the large companies (eg PMDG, Aerosoft, etc) are unlikely to develop an eight 340 based on previous stated comments. However, a smaller company could develop the 340 to catch 100% of that market as there’s no competition. Additionally, a freeware developer could choose to mimic the A340. Thus, any discussion within this thread is not going to alter the trajectory of said developers. In short, our discussion will not determine whether or not they develop an A340. Therefore, there’s no need to stifle the discussion.
  2. The viewpoint is predicated on explicit comments made by SEVERAL developers; for example, PMDG stated they lost money developing and selling the renowned MD-11. They unequivocally stated simmers are less apt to purchase aircraft they cannot see at thier home airports, which is why they explicitly chose not to port the MD11 to P3D. Also, you have no idea how well the aircraft you listed are selling...that's pure speculation on your end. If the DC-6 was a commercial success, why doesn't PMDG develop other aircraft from the same era? Instead, they seem fixated on developing commercially successful modern aircraft. The same is true for Aerosoft and Fenix. For the former two, they've been in this business for multiple decades and have copious amounts of market data. Obviously, they're going to chose to develop aircraft to achieve the highest profit margins. So, while the DC-6 may have sold well, there's no way it approached the PMDG 737 profit margins. I suspect the same is true for the BAe146 relative to the Fenix A320. Ditto FSL A320 vs Concord. Clearly there is no profit associated with flying simulated aircraft; what's odd is that you came to that conclusion...how bizarre. Profit, in this context, is clearly related to the topic and refers to the developers ability to model, market and sell thier aircraft to simmers; in that regard, the A320 and A350 are likely to be more profitable than the A340, based on explicit comments from PMDG, Aerosoft, etc. To my point, it's not about 'selling well', it's about profit margins. History has shown simulating a modern, commercially successful aircraft is going to outsell an aircraft that's considered a commercial failure, which is why the industry giants focus on the former.
  3. I will take the opposite approach; please don't waste resources developing a plane that ceased production more than a decade ago, is being phased out by many operators, and failed to gain commercial success when in full production. Instead, I believe a A350 and/or A220 would be FAR more profitable than an A340 model. Also, Aerosoft never modeled the A340; they distributed an A340 modeled by other developers. For FSX/P3D, I believe BlackBird (formally PSS) 'developed' an 'advanced' A340 for FSX/P3D, along with some other 'lite' versions (e.g. JustFlight). I suspect this aircraft won't make it to MSFS.
  4. I hope your windows 8 box is not connected to the internet as that operating system is riddled with vulnerabilities; Microsoft stopped patching Windows 8 more than 7 years ago. You can find the answer to your question here: https://answers.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/forum/all/running-ms-flight-simulator-2004-on-windows-10-pc/c51eb23d-015d-480d-8772-b8fc23f0fe3b good luck!
  5. kingm56

    Final words

    Thank you for sharing, Birdguy. Some great perspective that I hope others will benefit from.
  6. Hey! I went to a single aircraft pricing model; so, you do need to purchase each profile for $15 USD, or less. BTW, Next is MUCH better than Pro. Since I’m not doing this for the money, I can charge 50% less than the primary competitor, which is something I will ALWAYS do. Eventually, there will be an ultimate addition, which will include all aircraft for one price. If you’re looking for that now, MCE charges one price for all their supported aircraft. I bought MCE in 2012 for $59.99 and can still use that license today on MSFS. That’s 13 years of support, which is unheard of in the software industry. So, if FSFO isn’t your cup of tea, give MCE a look.
  7. Hey Gerald! I'm the developer for FSFO; however, I have immense respect for MCE and your exceptionally fair pricing scheme. If FSFO doesn't meet my users' needs, I always suggest MCE. It's a great product with great customer service. Matt
  8. I forgot to answer your AP question. If you don't want FSFO to engage/disengage your autopilot, go FSFO > ... > Configuration > SOPS and enter 0 in AUTOPILOT ON and AUTOPILOT OFF options. That tells FSFO to leave the autopilot alone.
  9. Hey Regis! If you downloaded FSFO from .to, you're probably using an older version. Get the latest version here: https://flightsimfirstofficer.com/downloads/ If you wait until Friday, version will be ready to use; you can use FSFOs default profile with any aircraft for free. Even as a free utility, you get a free Runway Advisory Alert System (RAAS), Pax/Cargo simulation, GSX integration (FSFO will control the GSX menu for you), full Log Book, passenger management (food, drinks, and seatbelts) and flight rating system. I'm also working on a full pilot career and company management module, which will integrate with FSFO and be free. If you're interested in FSFO's GSX integration, you can look below. Regardless, for your use, it doesn't sound like you need to pay for an FSFO aircraft profile...just use the free version...
  10. What is it? It’s the most overused and inflated phrase in Flight Sim history. Even the most basic plane can inspire and capture a flight enthusiast imagination.
  11. You're conflating FSX and P3D Capt Sim with thier current catalog; concerning the latter, they're a vastly different company today. To that point, you're paying for the external model only. The Capt Sim that productid the models you're referring to, which are now well over a decade old, are long gone. The new Capt Sim charges $15.00 for external models only, or $30 for external model that's tethered to the default 747 systems. There seems to be a fair amount to 'complain' over.
  12. Chris. I appreciate the logical and unemotional response. I sincerely don’t want to upset anyone, but believe I have made some valid points regarding the future of V6. I would like to set the record straight, if you don’t mind. 1. I did not criticize P3D V5 in its current form; its a fine simulator that I used for many years. Instead, I challenged the viability of future versions without third-party support. I did directly challenge a user who made multiple fabrications to promote ‘his stimulator.’ I would do the same if a MSFS user claimed P3D is full of bugs, or incapable of simulating a realistic flight. Both are complete fabrications and should be challenged. 2. I don’t consider myself an MSFS user; truth is, I rarely have free time to fly these days. I’ve only made 8 flights since Jan ‘22; 6 in MSFS and 2 in P3D. My AVSIM posts reflect that level of activity, or in this case, inactivity…they’re way down. So to classify me as an MSFS user who just comes here to stir up trouble is a gross misrepresentation. What I did do was make two statements of facts: 1. Multiple high profile developers have already left the maker, leaving only a spattering of developers remaining. You even have developers on AVSIM telling us the market is dead: This is no longer a disputable topic 2. Every single public domain data indicates P3D market has shrunk to FSX and Xplane 10 levels. Even multiple virtual airlines who post this data validate the Navigraph data. For example, deltaVa: https://www.deltava.org/simversionstats.do 3. With the current market, P3D V6 is unlikely to be a commercial success; there’s simply no entertainment market left The question concerning HiFI was legitimate, and something all P3D users should be concerned with. Without additional revenue streams, or market, how much longer can they afford to pay for the data and bandwidth necessary to operate their software? HiFI is a business, not a charity and this is a business 101 issue. None of this has anything to do with enjoying V5 in its current form, just like FSX users enjoy thief preferred sim if it’s current form Im simply reflecting on the viability of the platform after version 5… Please let know if I got anything wrong or if my thoughts are way off. Thanks again, Chris.
  13. Pete only helps out in the General forums these days; John is the sole developer now and a great guy.
  14. I ‘m curious, what does P3D do that MSFS doesn’t? The notion MSFS is a VFR/GA sim was proven a fairy tail long ago. Yes, some complex long haulers are still in development, but that has nothing to do with the base sim. In short, your argument Is tired, old and grossly inaccurate. There are not “many issues to solve” and “problems to be worked out.” That’s a hyperbolic statement that has no basis in reality. If you’re going to make said statement, you should quantify it with facts. You’re offering nothing but an abstract statement about there being too many to list, or an Implicit statement about many addon not working correctly…both are outright fabrications. I just flew vatsims cross the pond; so, I’m curious to uncover these issues that prevent simmers from performing long haul flights Now, if you have a favorite addon like the QW787 or PMDG 747, I get it. Yet, this has nothing to do with the sims capabilities There’s also not a ‘ton of support’ for P3D Every single objective data point says P3D has shrunk to FSX and Xplane 10 market share. This notion was just reinforced through Flight Sims largest survey. Again, there was just an aircraft released for P3D…it generated 4 whole pages of interest. That alone directly refuted the notion “there are ton of support.” P3D will absolutely continue to be near-and-dear to several simmers; just like FS9 and FSX. I have no doubt P3D will be used for the next decade, or more. However, the market is gone; without an active market, there won’t be third party addon Without addons, P3D is a very subpar sim; thus. the future is already somewhat resolved Finally, I never made any statements about what sim is best Who am I to tell ANYONE what sim is best? That’s up to you. All I did was make a statement of fact, which illicited an emotional response from you That facts are, Just Flight stopped p3d development midway through development of two aircraft, which means the market is so small, they opted to forgo invested resources. Aerosoft is done with P3D, and PMDG has their slate full for at least the next two years. This is just the tip of the ice berg, I could go on; but these are thd biggest names in flight sim, and they’re telling you there’s no market. P3D V6 isnt going to change that paradigm. In ordered to do so, they would have to decouple themselves from ESP, which they have a license for…it doesn’t make financial sense for them to do so. Plus, if they did, it would break backwards compatibility, which nullifies the reason you’re using P3D to begin with. Again, I am not telling you what sim to use…that’s up to you However, if you’re going to criticize a product, or a post, you should avoid fabricating statement (ie there being too many problems for you to list). btw, without an active revenue stream, how much longer do you think HiFI will keep their servers active? Tell me, does P3D have the ability to generate real time weather?
  15. The Capt Sim 24-hr 9.99 sale was something simmers looked forward to. Now. It’s just appropriately priced, or slightly overpriced.
  • Create New...