Jump to content

IcemanFBW

Members
  • Content Count

    74
  • Donations

    $0.00 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

605 Excellent

3 Followers

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
    No
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
    none
  • Virtual Airlines
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I wouldn't say we're competing with Fenix at all. We're just a bunch of developers and pilots working on this plane for fun in our free time, and giving back to the community. We don't have any investors or partners to answer to, and no investment to recoup. I would say this applies to pretty much any freeware project. On the other hand, payware companies ARE competing with both payware and high quality freeware projects, as either of these which offer significant functionality can compete with sales, and payware companies do have an investment to recoup, and profits to turn. Just my two cents.
  2. ToLiss has AutoTCAS modeled on their A321neo's. And, of course, we plan to model it as well 🙂
  3. It costs a around a few hundred to rent one for a day, not too bad - you just need to know the right people to haul one into a real airliner cockpit. We've been planning to do some real scans for a while for our A32NX remodel (from scratch), and we might as well get some A320 CEO scans too while we're at it (all funded by donations).
  4. On the topic of pricing, I do wonder whether the speculative price range of around $60 (based on that Reddit comment), given the supposed depth of this aircraft, will prompt any changes or reconsideration at PMDG and other similar developers regarding high fidelity payware aircraft pricing.
  5. Honestly surprised that no scenery developer has done LAX or LGA/JFK, from the two most populous US cities. And I would have expected Orbx to have done YMML already, considering that's their home airport and the 2nd biggest in Australia.
  6. I'll throw in my two cents here. I'm obviously biased towards MSFS though, since I'm heavily invested in development at FBW. MSFS has revolutionized consumer flight simulation by improving the overall experience and addressing many pain points that we just grew to tolerate with previous sims. No more downloading terabytes of ZL17 ortho and buying new hard drives for it or paying exorbitant sums for small regions of high quality payware ortho. No more paying for 3rd party plugins to improve weather accuracy and appearance to a decent level. No more paying for 3rd party plugins for basic ground services, lighting, autogen, sounds, etc. And no more paying for navdata from other providers when the sim should ship with updated cycles itself. And no more hassle dealing with updating all these plugins and finding out which one is causing crashes, or even organizing scenery order in multiple folders. With the continuing improvements being made to the rough edges of MSFS, and more 3rd party devs realizing this platform is the future, I don't see how X-Plane can viable compete in the long term, in the home desktop simulation market. Even more so given Austin's dismissive thoughts on streaming ortho and scenery (something that even FlightGear, a free flight sim, has a very rudimentary implementation of). I would love to be proven wrong by the XP team however - competition is good for everyone - but at this rate, I stand by my prediction.
  7. The textures (and some of the modeling) looks like it needs a LOT of work done... it might pass for P3D, but definitely not MSFS quality (at least for visuals) in my honest opinion.
  8. We've been working on a full version that is able to fly all ARINC-424 legs (including all holds and procedure turns), not just TF (track to fix) legs. Not to mention all of the code (specific to the real Honeywell Pegasus FMC) that goes into lateral navigation, as well as drawing the route on the navigation display. The navigation display itself is being re-written from scratch as part of this effort, and is already leading to some massive performance improvements. Plus, we'll be able to adapt this re-written ND for use in the A380X. Quality takes time, and we're not sparing any expense here, so to speak.
  9. Honestly can't tell too much of a difference between the handcrafted default KLAX and this add-on, coming from the perspective of someone who's flown in and out of KLAX in real life countless times. Wish there would be a KLAX add-on made by Orbx, FSDT or FlyTampa in high detail. Also seems heavy on frames.
  10. I've spoken with them personally and encouraged them to go open-source, as it would allow others to contribute and further improve the project, as well as help anyone else wanting to make a helicopter. Unfortunately, they refused, stating "With being only 1 of 2 helicopters available for the sim some of our development tricks are obviously valuable and for that reason we can’t make our project open source." I do hope they reconsider, and I'm not the biggest fan of this price tag (almost near the cost of the Aerosoft CRJ), as well the concept of a preorder - which we've seen backfire many times in the gaming community.
  11. This is to prevent spam, as we have over 34,000 users on our Discord server, and that number is constantly growing. We're all volunteers working in our free time (not just the developers but the moderators as well), and don't have the time to put up with spammers and repeat offenders constantly creating new accounts. Requiring your Discord account to have a registered phone number is our best tool to combat this, as it is significantly more effort for people to create multiple accounts with this requirement in place. This is an unfortunate side effect of maintaining a large server. As other users have said, we do not even get to see your phone number at all - this is all handled through Discord itself. I personally recommend linking a phone number regardless, for two-factor authentication, as it is a good way to secure your account from ever being hacked.
  12. Correct. There's currently an issue where it is decelerating on wet/snowy runways, but we cannot change that ourselves since the SDK doesn't currently allow us to modify any ground friction/handling constants.
  13. We're in communication with Asobo to get the necessary weather functions (among other requests) in the sim so proper VNAV is possible.
×
×
  • Create New...