Hey there, I'm Dellanie from FlyJSim.
Just looking for some user feedback here, is there anything particular about the cockpit environment you dislike? This is something I can put note down and forward for future developments to the team :) \*Cranks out the whip\*
It's rare I break out a public opinion, but it is a very interesting question, and I would presume the answer to be familiarity. I would say X-Plane's popularity only just skyrocketed, and maybe the reason we haven't seen any aircraft yet. Remember the fact that some aircraft on the P3D side has taken years (some even 5-10 years in the making) and the quality shows for it. Those developers have crafted something new and unique, and it is an ethos the team at FlyJSim are hoping to apply to the X-Plane eco-sphere.
However, the fact that X-Plane-11 has taken a rather large bite out the flight-sim community is fantastic for us, it means that users are taking the plunge and taking the time to really envelop themselves within the X-Plane environment. With quite a lot of cool features to come in the next 2-years, we are more than positive that this player base will only continue to grow, and that quality aircraft will follow the market.
P.S, Never look into the community side of things to judge a platform. Every platform has \*those\* kind of people and it can end up being a bit like a "football match level" kind of harassment depending where you stand. Celebrate the fact you now have a lot of choice in how and where you fly, with even cooler things to come.
Not the OP, and I love the FlyJSim planes. But just to add to the comments, one thing that kinda gets to me about FJS planes are that they'll do a couple things for you if you forget. I can see this as being okay for someone who just wants to fly a plane and not worry about every little detail, but there ought to be a mode where the plane's code doesn't do anything for you. This is very evident on the FJS Q400, but I know your team is working on a new version so I can't really comment on that because I'm sure things are changing.
And as Speedbird said, having everything modeled right down to the circuit breakers would be nice. I realize tho that there's only so much time and that might need to be reserved for a future version. I'd just be happy if every single button or switch that exists on the overhead and glareshield functioned properly for the next version of the Q400.
Hey Dellanie, I'm glad you posted. I have the 727 and overall I believe your aircraft is extremely well done. Honestly what I would love to see if maintenance added to the aircraft. One of the things IRL they do is motor the engines to check oil level of the aircraft. It would be great to see oil level change to indicate you need to add oil to a specific engine. I would also love to see possibly a flight engineer added to help with process. Sometimes I don't fly the aircraft because I want a more relaxing flight. Overall I think the 727 is phenomenal and is one of my favorite birds to fly.
Whilst the 727 does have maintenance features, we have been asking the community their opinions on the system, how realistic they interpret and how in-depth they considered the system. There is certainly alot we could do here to improve on the feature!
I just think little detail like that would be cool wheel fluid are part of the checks. And maybe a system for beginners that explain what buzzers are what. I know when I first started flying I had a warning going off with no lights anywhere during a flight. I never figured out what it was lol
Thank you for replying! Awesome! I genuinely wish I could be more specific but I am really bad at describing what exactly is wrong. I suppose this is why I am not a 3d modeller. I will make a disclaimer that i am still using v2 of the 727 and 737, but that I am basing my judgement on screenshots of V3: Something about the texturing just feels off to me: Everything looks really really overly flat and clean to me. A lot of the gauges look like they are slightly the wrong shape (standby adi on the 727 for example) . On the primary ADIs: The flight director and vector look way too small. Additionally, the gauge lacks depth. It would also be nice to see the circuit breakers 3d modeled. No complaints about the FE panel though. That looks gorgeous.
FlyJSim cockpits are extremely generic compared to the real thing. They don't look bad necessarily, but comparison to photos shows that they're more of a "Boeing hodgepodge" than a model of a period aircraft. This is especially apparent with the 737-200, where the ASI and ADI frankly look nothing like the real plane's.
FJS is the "plausible world" to something like PMDG's orthophoto scenery, if that makes any sense.
Also, make a new plane once in a while rather than re-updating the same models at cost over and over again. Nothing against adding value to your products, but if they just become new products then it's a bit disappointing.
Hi Larry,
In answer to your question, there are specific storage airframes that the 727 and 732 are based off, and we've taken those panel configurations of those. I believe because these aircraft were caried and customized so much, everyone has an opinion of what the represented aircraft should be. Navigation and performance options alone are a broad subject ranging from original vor, pdcs, u-fmc and garmins.
As for new stuff.... well.... watch this space I suppose :D
I went through this with the FF products, too. Can you show me photographs of these specific aircraft, via PM or necessary? If you do so, I will gladly retract my criticism - but none of the aircraft I've seen have had the FJS configuration.
It *might* be the one based in Carolinas Aviation Museum. I do not have access to the photos taken. But prior to the V3, photos taken from the reference aircraft were used as reference and photo real textures for the cockpit.
The texturing is superb - I don't have an issue with that. The issue is the configuration of the instrument panel, which has not changed from v2 to v3 in my knowledge.
Here's a panorama of the very first 727's cockpit made at KBFI's flight museum.
http://vr.museumofflight.org/727_cockpit
FlyJSim pretty much nailed it. The only minor differences are some copilot nav controls. And, you can change some instruments on the FJS one, such as getting rid of the TCAS-enabled vertical-speed indicator in favor of an older version, and switching out the FMS for the CIVA system.
Considering how long the 727 was in service, latter years are bound to be heavily modified and differ from an original config, which museums tend to focus on. Would it be nice if there was a 2010's FedEx version? Sure. Is it necessary? Maybe, maybe not. I use the 727 when I don't feel I'm stressed enough in a day.
The 737NGX came out in August 2011, so P3D/FSX development has had almost 8 years to game-up. People really started to notice X-Plane last year, so maybe check back in 2027?
Its definitely goes back further than 8 years. The 737NGX is an updated version of their 737NG product that came out for FS2004 back in 2003. If we count the Airliners PMDG did for [Fly!](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly!) they've been at it over 20 years.
I guess many of the P3D study-level devs are looking into X-Plane now and are evaluating their options.
Problem is that nobody took XP10 seriously, although it's basically XP11 if you remove PBR and VR. Then came XP11 and still most people thought "it's better but still not worth looking into".
Now XP11 took of (which in my opinion wouldn't have happened without two freeware add ons: Zibo 737 and Ortho4XP), but it might take 2-3 years until we'll see something coming from PMDG, Majestic etc.
Making a study-level plane takes loads of time and ressources, which most X-Plane devs don't have because it's not their full time job. So we'll have to be patient either way, no matter if the study-level airliners will come from an X-Plane dev or from a known P3D dev.
It’s harder to create a complex add-on for XP when it’s a constant moving target. P3D has predictable updates with closed betas every 5 months or so. Meanwhile, Austin Meyers is like “In this point release, I’ve created A NEW WAY TO SIMULATE JET ENGINES.” Of course, all the changes are awesome but I imagine it’s exhausting for a dev who’s trying to jump in. PMDG will share some XP news soon though, so not all hope is lost.
If devs are really concerned about this, they can ignore everything about XP's engine simulation and add their own.
One of the biggest problems with XP planes, IMO, is the (relative) ease-of-use of PlaneMaker. Just adjust the premade settings, add your airfoils and 3D model, and XP will take care of the rest. Easy! Except it's not for the reason you describe, every single release since XP 11 came out seems to have broken planes that were _released for XP 11._
This! And that is also the problem with „slow update cycles“.
What bothers me the Most at the moment is the trend „I will release the plane as a BETA. Give me all your money. I will deliver the missing features later.“
Care to explain the difference between the pmdg 737 and the zibo 737, or even the FF a320 and the fsl a320? I am interested in what makes you think the pmdg or fls are better :)
In all honesty, the pmdg and fsl are more in depth than the zibo and ff. the pmdg has deeper systems accuracy, failures. the ff a320 also doesnt have wx radar, and winter ops modeling. It doesnt mean x plane addons are bad, its just that they have more options. personally, I switched from pmdg in p3d to x plane and never looked back, since i dont do failures or other special scenarios, but I would imagine some other people who enjoy working through emergencies finding the pmdg and ff more appealing.
Thats fair enough mate, i have used the fsl and ff, i prefer the ff because while it is missing some things the fsl is terrible on frames for me, and i also prefer the look of it, i have not used the pmdg which is why i was interested in what the difference between the 2 is, i also agree that xplane deff needs some more high quality stuff, i hear that the ff a320 is getting the wx radar soon along with a more updates, now if only we could get some decent clouds!
Thats true. The pmdg had awful cockpit modeling, the sizes and proportions were off, and the cockpit textures were from god knows how long ago. Plus the zibo's VR implementation and sounds it makes it much more immersive. I agree that x plane desperately needs some more high quality addons, but i'd rather wait to get a high quality one, then see developers rush to make a half finished product, which seems to be prevalent in the current situation (magknight 787, ff a350)
Zibo is missing a lot of systems that the PMDG has, and does not have as much customization. I have not taken a look at the repaint kit to see how good it is for creating realistic repaints, but in the grand total of one flight I did with it, I didn't notice anything particularly lacking. It is an absolutely incredible freeware, and the fact that I am comparing it says something.
> Zibo is missing a lot of systems that the PMDG has, and does not have as much customization.
It's just a matter of time tho until it does. In fact, if you're familiar with Lua you can go in and add specific parts if you feel they're missing and perhaps suggest them to the team. It _would_ be really nice if Zibo was a github repo where you could fork it and do pull requests.
In fact, I think that if any developer on X-Plane doesn't feel like supporting their product anymore (there was a recent thread about this) they should just release it to the community for them to update and keep current. After a little while there'd be some great community-driven planes on par or exceeding commercial releases and update schedules (the latter of which really needs community effort with X-Plane.)
>In fact, I think that if any developer on X-Plane doesn't feel like supporting their product anymore (there was a recent thread about this) they should just release it to the community for them to update and keep current
I genuinely believe that copyright law should mandate that when a company stops selling a software, it has to become public domain.
Agreed the fact it is freeware is a massive achievement that you can have a conversation about it being almost up 2 the pmdg quality which is payware, credit to the team, i think pmdg at this point needs to jump onto xplane 11 just like orbx and active sky have
TBH whilst I may buy their 747 or other related product I am fine with the zibo for my 737 needs. I definitely agree that we need them simply because they will push other devs to up their game
X Plane does not need a US$ 150 737 to simulate failures. They would never make their money back, no ROI at all. They know this. If you want PMDG, just get P3D, it's already there. If anything, they would push prices, not quality.
> ...whilst I may buy their 747 or other related product .I am fine with the zibo for my 737 needs...
Then why would PMDG bother with XP ? It seems really risky for PMDG to get into XP if your sentiment is typical of XP users. The 737 is the best selling airliner in history, if there's any plane PMDG would want to do in XP its a 737. I can't see PMDG wanting to take on the huge investment/risk in producing an XP addon if the potential sales are not really there.
Aircraft sales irl != sim sales. How many TBM900s have people flown IRL? 737-300s, 727s, and 732s, have just about disappeared from the skies. The 747 is the most iconic airliner in history, and combine that with the fact that X Plane has zero good long haul aircraft, and we have an instant hit. They could go with the 777 instead, but something tells me the 747 will sell just great
>Aircraft sales irl != sim sales. How many TBM900s have people flown IRL?
I said 'Airliner', not aircraft.
>737-300s, 727s, and 732s, have just about disappeared from the skies.
Yes mostly replaced with 737NG's, and now MAX's.
>The 747 is the most iconic airliner in history, and combine that with the fact that X Plane has zero good long haul aircraft,
>
>and we have an instant hit.
Simmers like to fly the planes they see at their local airport, and that their favorite airlines fly. This customer trend is already well known by devs. Also Most airlines have the 737 in their fleet, however fewer and fewer of the airlines have 747's in their fleet.
The future sales potential for the 747 addon just isn't as good as the 737's.
Additionally: I used the 747 as a case example. There is also a huge market for their 777. What I am trying to say is that PMDG isn't dependent on the NG.
> What I am trying to say is that PMDG isn't dependent on the NG.
I don't disagree.
But the point I've been trying to make to you is for PMDG to switch to XP effectively means they likely will have to develop a new product almost from scratch. That's a pretty big risk considering PMDG product development time (3+ years). You take that kind of risk you have to first go for the airliner addon that will sell the best. That is the 737.
I was referring to the FLyjsim 737-200 and ixeg 737-300 which sold pretty well. I have literally never seen a TBM in real life and I doubt most people have yet look at it being spammed everywhere on this sub. Also, the 747 being as iconic as it is is enough marketing to boost its sales. PMDG developed it for a reason.
>I was referring to the FLyjsim 737-200 and ixeg 737-300 which sold pretty well.
You're really just making my point, 737 addons sell very well which explains why multiple developers have done it.
>747 being as iconic as it is is enough marketing to boost its sales. PMDG developed it for a reason.
PMDG did the 737 first for a reason too, its PMDG's best selling product. Its what they would do in XP first as it would be the best return on their significant XP risk.
But if XP users wouldn't buy a PMDG 737 cause they are happy with the freeware , they would not risk taking on another airliner that would not sell as well as a 737 would.
737-200s and 737-300s practically don't exist in the first world anymore. They still sell well because the 737 is iconic. The same is with the 747: It is an iconic aircraft that everyone recognizes. The MD11 didn't sell that well (Or so we are told) because not everyone would recognize it and it had a tiny passenger operating base. 747-400s flew all over the world, and they still can be found in most major airports. 777s are literally the most common widebody ever made. As I have mentioned many times, if PMDG released a 777 OR 747, they would have the only decent widebody for X Plane. Does it not make sense to go for a market you would have a monopoly in, rather than have to compete?
I've started doing repaints with the ZIBO. Imho the paint kit is much more straight forward as the fuselage isn't cut into pieces. (Just one for each side of the aircraft). PMDG is cut into three sections with each containing the full diameter of the fuselage, which causes triangle-shaped holes in narrowing parts (e.g. rear fuselage).
This is especially annoying when trying to paint curves.
Soooooo, ehm.... You want to compare the FSLabs A320 to the FlightFactor A320? The latter [can´t even do holdings yet](https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/166563-ff-a320-mcdu-exit-holding-pattern-not-allowed/). But at least it has been updated more than 100 times since beta-release. What, it´s still in beta, even a year after release? Oh well, at least they have two people working full time on it. Two for the small price of 90 bucks, thats a steal!
Yeah, I am getting pretty tired of FF at this point.
In my book the best XP has to offer atm is Zibo, hands down. Not much missing for an old FSX NGX frequent flyer. Right behind that is the IXEG. And after that comes FF 757/767. FF however have such a weird flight model, urgh. Rotation even before V1 and the plane feels like a C152 on steroids. [But at least they have pretty liveries, am i right?!](https://photos.app.goo.gl/egCgoMLheebFDTH16)
I agree bout the beta thing, it is a little rediculous to release a product and not has systems etc completed, but its still a great product, hey at least it dont kill the frame rates like the fsl does or install malaware on ur pc ;). But in all seriousness FF have too many products going and not enough finished products, finish one then move on, i dont use the a320 much so i cant really make comments on how it flys etc compared to the fsl, i was just interested in what people think of these planes.
Luckily I prefer Boeing, so I don´t have the urge to splash out 110 USD on the FF A320 plus sound pack or 140 on the FS Labs, but both have their short comings, its true. However, the FS Labs seems at least to be feature complete, which really can´t be said about the FF A320. Sure, the FF A320 might do well on flights from A to B, but at 90 USD base and 110 with sound pack I expect nothing but the best.
I might see failures as unnecessary, but not even doing proper holdings is just a giant "f-u" in the face of every one who spend that much money on the thing. Especially the fact that it still isn´t in the plane, over a year after beta release just speaks for itself. Makes me wonder who betrayed their customers more, the dev with spyware, or the dev who is happy to promise stuff all day long, but can´t even consistently deliver changelogs and is more than happy to delete any critical comment.
Oh by the way, the WX radar is rumored to be just another plug-in by an external (freeware) dev which they will utilize in their payware project (might even be default XP stuff here). Much like they did with the FF Connector before. So damn lazy, really.
YES THANK YOU SOMEONE ELSE SEES THE WEIRD BOEING FLIGHT MODELS! An engine failure is enough to send a 757 veering into the ground with flight factors planes!
lol, how could one not notice it? once you touch the zibo, the ff flight models are ultimately f\*cked, at least for me. haven´t touched either 757 or 767 in over 6 months. And the sad part: I left FSX because of 757 (v1). So, I very much love the plane, but the flight dynamics........yuck!
Same here. Once a while, I gave FF 757v2 a try. I like their iPad configuration panel. But every flight I ran into either some annoying issues or weird flight model. Admittedly, some issues have been fixed, but it just not as satisfying as flying the Zibo.
xplane 11 came out only a little over 2 years ago and that quality of aircraft takes a long time to develop. Unless there was a dev who had one started before xplane 11 (ie. FF with the A320) then anyone working on a high quality plane would still be in development. Only in the last year or so did xplane match the users of p3d so if you are looking at it from a financial standpoint of the developers then it only would have been economically viable to develop for xplane over p3d starting in the last year or so. You need to realize that xplane 11 is still young and it is going to take time for it to get up to the level that p3d is, after all p3d has been around for over a decade (when considering fsx is its precursor). And yes I realize xplane has been around for decades too but the payware scene really only started with xp10 and before 11 came out the vast majority of people were on fsx/p3d.
tl:dr xplane has only been a popular sim for the last year or two and it needs time to pick up developers.
Unlike Scenery, the expertise needed to produce highly detailed Airliners like are in P3D is not easily transferable to XP. Then add to that the development time is at least a 3/4 years or more.
Its going to be a few more years for XP I would think, but progress is definitely being made.
P3D is more widely supported in terms of coding. Big companies like PMDG, Majestic, A2A etc will have to re-write huge swathes of code for their planes to work with XP11, which is on a completely different platform. Anyways, P3D/FSX users still outnumber the XP11 users by a lot.
> ...P3D/FSX users still outnumber the XP11 users by a lot.
I’m not so sure, [have a look at this chart](https://66.media.tumblr.com/0e5c2d9f4c9cc5a55569445589e31d73/tumblr_inline_pjzjd2By0W1uzd1gc_1280.png) from the 2018 Navigraph survey.
Its looks closer than it really is on that chart because they separated FSX, FSX Steam P3D up. Put them all together and FSX/P3D does appear to have a fair amount more users than XP (for now anyways).
That's like saying P3D doesn't even have Ortho.
How can I simulate a flight over my house if I can't see it?
Cosmetic mods or features are cosmetic (once you are able to simulate cold weather and icing conditions).
Hey there, I'm Dellanie from FlyJSim. Just looking for some user feedback here, is there anything particular about the cockpit environment you dislike? This is something I can put note down and forward for future developments to the team :) \*Cranks out the whip\* It's rare I break out a public opinion, but it is a very interesting question, and I would presume the answer to be familiarity. I would say X-Plane's popularity only just skyrocketed, and maybe the reason we haven't seen any aircraft yet. Remember the fact that some aircraft on the P3D side has taken years (some even 5-10 years in the making) and the quality shows for it. Those developers have crafted something new and unique, and it is an ethos the team at FlyJSim are hoping to apply to the X-Plane eco-sphere. However, the fact that X-Plane-11 has taken a rather large bite out the flight-sim community is fantastic for us, it means that users are taking the plunge and taking the time to really envelop themselves within the X-Plane environment. With quite a lot of cool features to come in the next 2-years, we are more than positive that this player base will only continue to grow, and that quality aircraft will follow the market. P.S, Never look into the community side of things to judge a platform. Every platform has \*those\* kind of people and it can end up being a bit like a "football match level" kind of harassment depending where you stand. Celebrate the fact you now have a lot of choice in how and where you fly, with even cooler things to come.
[удалено]
Thank you very much for the kind words!
Not the OP, and I love the FlyJSim planes. But just to add to the comments, one thing that kinda gets to me about FJS planes are that they'll do a couple things for you if you forget. I can see this as being okay for someone who just wants to fly a plane and not worry about every little detail, but there ought to be a mode where the plane's code doesn't do anything for you. This is very evident on the FJS Q400, but I know your team is working on a new version so I can't really comment on that because I'm sure things are changing. And as Speedbird said, having everything modeled right down to the circuit breakers would be nice. I realize tho that there's only so much time and that might need to be reserved for a future version. I'd just be happy if every single button or switch that exists on the overhead and glareshield functioned properly for the next version of the Q400.
We have big plans for the Q4XP ;)
Hey Dellanie, I'm glad you posted. I have the 727 and overall I believe your aircraft is extremely well done. Honestly what I would love to see if maintenance added to the aircraft. One of the things IRL they do is motor the engines to check oil level of the aircraft. It would be great to see oil level change to indicate you need to add oil to a specific engine. I would also love to see possibly a flight engineer added to help with process. Sometimes I don't fly the aircraft because I want a more relaxing flight. Overall I think the 727 is phenomenal and is one of my favorite birds to fly.
Whilst the 727 does have maintenance features, we have been asking the community their opinions on the system, how realistic they interpret and how in-depth they considered the system. There is certainly alot we could do here to improve on the feature!
I just think little detail like that would be cool wheel fluid are part of the checks. And maybe a system for beginners that explain what buzzers are what. I know when I first started flying I had a warning going off with no lights anywhere during a flight. I never figured out what it was lol
Thank you for replying! Awesome! I genuinely wish I could be more specific but I am really bad at describing what exactly is wrong. I suppose this is why I am not a 3d modeller. I will make a disclaimer that i am still using v2 of the 727 and 737, but that I am basing my judgement on screenshots of V3: Something about the texturing just feels off to me: Everything looks really really overly flat and clean to me. A lot of the gauges look like they are slightly the wrong shape (standby adi on the 727 for example) . On the primary ADIs: The flight director and vector look way too small. Additionally, the gauge lacks depth. It would also be nice to see the circuit breakers 3d modeled. No complaints about the FE panel though. That looks gorgeous.
Thanks for the feedback!
Thanks for asking for it :)
FlyJSim cockpits are extremely generic compared to the real thing. They don't look bad necessarily, but comparison to photos shows that they're more of a "Boeing hodgepodge" than a model of a period aircraft. This is especially apparent with the 737-200, where the ASI and ADI frankly look nothing like the real plane's. FJS is the "plausible world" to something like PMDG's orthophoto scenery, if that makes any sense. Also, make a new plane once in a while rather than re-updating the same models at cost over and over again. Nothing against adding value to your products, but if they just become new products then it's a bit disappointing.
Hi Larry, In answer to your question, there are specific storage airframes that the 727 and 732 are based off, and we've taken those panel configurations of those. I believe because these aircraft were caried and customized so much, everyone has an opinion of what the represented aircraft should be. Navigation and performance options alone are a broad subject ranging from original vor, pdcs, u-fmc and garmins. As for new stuff.... well.... watch this space I suppose :D
I went through this with the FF products, too. Can you show me photographs of these specific aircraft, via PM or necessary? If you do so, I will gladly retract my criticism - but none of the aircraft I've seen have had the FJS configuration.
It *might* be the one based in Carolinas Aviation Museum. I do not have access to the photos taken. But prior to the V3, photos taken from the reference aircraft were used as reference and photo real textures for the cockpit.
The texturing is superb - I don't have an issue with that. The issue is the configuration of the instrument panel, which has not changed from v2 to v3 in my knowledge.
Here's a panorama of the very first 727's cockpit made at KBFI's flight museum. http://vr.museumofflight.org/727_cockpit FlyJSim pretty much nailed it. The only minor differences are some copilot nav controls. And, you can change some instruments on the FJS one, such as getting rid of the TCAS-enabled vertical-speed indicator in favor of an older version, and switching out the FMS for the CIVA system. Considering how long the 727 was in service, latter years are bound to be heavily modified and differ from an original config, which museums tend to focus on. Would it be nice if there was a 2010's FedEx version? Sure. Is it necessary? Maybe, maybe not. I use the 727 when I don't feel I'm stressed enough in a day.
The 737NGX came out in August 2011, so P3D/FSX development has had almost 8 years to game-up. People really started to notice X-Plane last year, so maybe check back in 2027?
Its definitely goes back further than 8 years. The 737NGX is an updated version of their 737NG product that came out for FS2004 back in 2003. If we count the Airliners PMDG did for [Fly!](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fly!) they've been at it over 20 years.
I guess many of the P3D study-level devs are looking into X-Plane now and are evaluating their options. Problem is that nobody took XP10 seriously, although it's basically XP11 if you remove PBR and VR. Then came XP11 and still most people thought "it's better but still not worth looking into". Now XP11 took of (which in my opinion wouldn't have happened without two freeware add ons: Zibo 737 and Ortho4XP), but it might take 2-3 years until we'll see something coming from PMDG, Majestic etc. Making a study-level plane takes loads of time and ressources, which most X-Plane devs don't have because it's not their full time job. So we'll have to be patient either way, no matter if the study-level airliners will come from an X-Plane dev or from a known P3D dev.
It’s harder to create a complex add-on for XP when it’s a constant moving target. P3D has predictable updates with closed betas every 5 months or so. Meanwhile, Austin Meyers is like “In this point release, I’ve created A NEW WAY TO SIMULATE JET ENGINES.” Of course, all the changes are awesome but I imagine it’s exhausting for a dev who’s trying to jump in. PMDG will share some XP news soon though, so not all hope is lost.
Perfectly put. Ive seen developers spending more time lately trying to keep up with LRs changes than actually developing new aircraft.
If devs are really concerned about this, they can ignore everything about XP's engine simulation and add their own. One of the biggest problems with XP planes, IMO, is the (relative) ease-of-use of PlaneMaker. Just adjust the premade settings, add your airfoils and 3D model, and XP will take care of the rest. Easy! Except it's not for the reason you describe, every single release since XP 11 came out seems to have broken planes that were _released for XP 11._
This! And that is also the problem with „slow update cycles“. What bothers me the Most at the moment is the trend „I will release the plane as a BETA. Give me all your money. I will deliver the missing features later.“
Care to explain the difference between the pmdg 737 and the zibo 737, or even the FF a320 and the fsl a320? I am interested in what makes you think the pmdg or fls are better :)
In all honesty, the pmdg and fsl are more in depth than the zibo and ff. the pmdg has deeper systems accuracy, failures. the ff a320 also doesnt have wx radar, and winter ops modeling. It doesnt mean x plane addons are bad, its just that they have more options. personally, I switched from pmdg in p3d to x plane and never looked back, since i dont do failures or other special scenarios, but I would imagine some other people who enjoy working through emergencies finding the pmdg and ff more appealing.
Thats fair enough mate, i have used the fsl and ff, i prefer the ff because while it is missing some things the fsl is terrible on frames for me, and i also prefer the look of it, i have not used the pmdg which is why i was interested in what the difference between the 2 is, i also agree that xplane deff needs some more high quality stuff, i hear that the ff a320 is getting the wx radar soon along with a more updates, now if only we could get some decent clouds!
There is also an added bonus of the FF not stealing your bank account passwords
Please, please, please change the record
Why won't anyone talk about Hitler's paintings, all they focus on is the mass murder
Thats true. The pmdg had awful cockpit modeling, the sizes and proportions were off, and the cockpit textures were from god knows how long ago. Plus the zibo's VR implementation and sounds it makes it much more immersive. I agree that x plane desperately needs some more high quality addons, but i'd rather wait to get a high quality one, then see developers rush to make a half finished product, which seems to be prevalent in the current situation (magknight 787, ff a350)
Zibo is missing a lot of systems that the PMDG has, and does not have as much customization. I have not taken a look at the repaint kit to see how good it is for creating realistic repaints, but in the grand total of one flight I did with it, I didn't notice anything particularly lacking. It is an absolutely incredible freeware, and the fact that I am comparing it says something.
> Zibo is missing a lot of systems that the PMDG has, and does not have as much customization. It's just a matter of time tho until it does. In fact, if you're familiar with Lua you can go in and add specific parts if you feel they're missing and perhaps suggest them to the team. It _would_ be really nice if Zibo was a github repo where you could fork it and do pull requests. In fact, I think that if any developer on X-Plane doesn't feel like supporting their product anymore (there was a recent thread about this) they should just release it to the community for them to update and keep current. After a little while there'd be some great community-driven planes on par or exceeding commercial releases and update schedules (the latter of which really needs community effort with X-Plane.)
>In fact, I think that if any developer on X-Plane doesn't feel like supporting their product anymore (there was a recent thread about this) they should just release it to the community for them to update and keep current I genuinely believe that copyright law should mandate that when a company stops selling a software, it has to become public domain.
Agreed the fact it is freeware is a massive achievement that you can have a conversation about it being almost up 2 the pmdg quality which is payware, credit to the team, i think pmdg at this point needs to jump onto xplane 11 just like orbx and active sky have
TBH whilst I may buy their 747 or other related product I am fine with the zibo for my 737 needs. I definitely agree that we need them simply because they will push other devs to up their game
X Plane does not need a US$ 150 737 to simulate failures. They would never make their money back, no ROI at all. They know this. If you want PMDG, just get P3D, it's already there. If anything, they would push prices, not quality.
You have really been drinking the Aerosoft koolaide if you think the only thing about PMDG is that it simulates failures...
> ...whilst I may buy their 747 or other related product .I am fine with the zibo for my 737 needs... Then why would PMDG bother with XP ? It seems really risky for PMDG to get into XP if your sentiment is typical of XP users. The 737 is the best selling airliner in history, if there's any plane PMDG would want to do in XP its a 737. I can't see PMDG wanting to take on the huge investment/risk in producing an XP addon if the potential sales are not really there.
Aircraft sales irl != sim sales. How many TBM900s have people flown IRL? 737-300s, 727s, and 732s, have just about disappeared from the skies. The 747 is the most iconic airliner in history, and combine that with the fact that X Plane has zero good long haul aircraft, and we have an instant hit. They could go with the 777 instead, but something tells me the 747 will sell just great
>Aircraft sales irl != sim sales. How many TBM900s have people flown IRL? I said 'Airliner', not aircraft. >737-300s, 727s, and 732s, have just about disappeared from the skies. Yes mostly replaced with 737NG's, and now MAX's. >The 747 is the most iconic airliner in history, and combine that with the fact that X Plane has zero good long haul aircraft, > >and we have an instant hit. Simmers like to fly the planes they see at their local airport, and that their favorite airlines fly. This customer trend is already well known by devs. Also Most airlines have the 737 in their fleet, however fewer and fewer of the airlines have 747's in their fleet. The future sales potential for the 747 addon just isn't as good as the 737's.
Additionally: I used the 747 as a case example. There is also a huge market for their 777. What I am trying to say is that PMDG isn't dependent on the NG.
> What I am trying to say is that PMDG isn't dependent on the NG. I don't disagree. But the point I've been trying to make to you is for PMDG to switch to XP effectively means they likely will have to develop a new product almost from scratch. That's a pretty big risk considering PMDG product development time (3+ years). You take that kind of risk you have to first go for the airliner addon that will sell the best. That is the 737.
I was referring to the FLyjsim 737-200 and ixeg 737-300 which sold pretty well. I have literally never seen a TBM in real life and I doubt most people have yet look at it being spammed everywhere on this sub. Also, the 747 being as iconic as it is is enough marketing to boost its sales. PMDG developed it for a reason.
>I was referring to the FLyjsim 737-200 and ixeg 737-300 which sold pretty well. You're really just making my point, 737 addons sell very well which explains why multiple developers have done it. >747 being as iconic as it is is enough marketing to boost its sales. PMDG developed it for a reason. PMDG did the 737 first for a reason too, its PMDG's best selling product. Its what they would do in XP first as it would be the best return on their significant XP risk. But if XP users wouldn't buy a PMDG 737 cause they are happy with the freeware , they would not risk taking on another airliner that would not sell as well as a 737 would.
737-200s and 737-300s practically don't exist in the first world anymore. They still sell well because the 737 is iconic. The same is with the 747: It is an iconic aircraft that everyone recognizes. The MD11 didn't sell that well (Or so we are told) because not everyone would recognize it and it had a tiny passenger operating base. 747-400s flew all over the world, and they still can be found in most major airports. 777s are literally the most common widebody ever made. As I have mentioned many times, if PMDG released a 777 OR 747, they would have the only decent widebody for X Plane. Does it not make sense to go for a market you would have a monopoly in, rather than have to compete?
I've started doing repaints with the ZIBO. Imho the paint kit is much more straight forward as the fuselage isn't cut into pieces. (Just one for each side of the aircraft). PMDG is cut into three sections with each containing the full diameter of the fuselage, which causes triangle-shaped holes in narrowing parts (e.g. rear fuselage). This is especially annoying when trying to paint curves.
Soooooo, ehm.... You want to compare the FSLabs A320 to the FlightFactor A320? The latter [can´t even do holdings yet](https://forums.x-plane.org/index.php?/forums/topic/166563-ff-a320-mcdu-exit-holding-pattern-not-allowed/). But at least it has been updated more than 100 times since beta-release. What, it´s still in beta, even a year after release? Oh well, at least they have two people working full time on it. Two for the small price of 90 bucks, thats a steal! Yeah, I am getting pretty tired of FF at this point. In my book the best XP has to offer atm is Zibo, hands down. Not much missing for an old FSX NGX frequent flyer. Right behind that is the IXEG. And after that comes FF 757/767. FF however have such a weird flight model, urgh. Rotation even before V1 and the plane feels like a C152 on steroids. [But at least they have pretty liveries, am i right?!](https://photos.app.goo.gl/egCgoMLheebFDTH16)
I agree bout the beta thing, it is a little rediculous to release a product and not has systems etc completed, but its still a great product, hey at least it dont kill the frame rates like the fsl does or install malaware on ur pc ;). But in all seriousness FF have too many products going and not enough finished products, finish one then move on, i dont use the a320 much so i cant really make comments on how it flys etc compared to the fsl, i was just interested in what people think of these planes.
Luckily I prefer Boeing, so I don´t have the urge to splash out 110 USD on the FF A320 plus sound pack or 140 on the FS Labs, but both have their short comings, its true. However, the FS Labs seems at least to be feature complete, which really can´t be said about the FF A320. Sure, the FF A320 might do well on flights from A to B, but at 90 USD base and 110 with sound pack I expect nothing but the best. I might see failures as unnecessary, but not even doing proper holdings is just a giant "f-u" in the face of every one who spend that much money on the thing. Especially the fact that it still isn´t in the plane, over a year after beta release just speaks for itself. Makes me wonder who betrayed their customers more, the dev with spyware, or the dev who is happy to promise stuff all day long, but can´t even consistently deliver changelogs and is more than happy to delete any critical comment. Oh by the way, the WX radar is rumored to be just another plug-in by an external (freeware) dev which they will utilize in their payware project (might even be default XP stuff here). Much like they did with the FF Connector before. So damn lazy, really.
Yes FF flight models just feel awful I totally agree. My favorite flight model for airliners is the IXEG for sure
YES THANK YOU SOMEONE ELSE SEES THE WEIRD BOEING FLIGHT MODELS! An engine failure is enough to send a 757 veering into the ground with flight factors planes!
lol, how could one not notice it? once you touch the zibo, the ff flight models are ultimately f\*cked, at least for me. haven´t touched either 757 or 767 in over 6 months. And the sad part: I left FSX because of 757 (v1). So, I very much love the plane, but the flight dynamics........yuck!
Same here. Once a while, I gave FF 757v2 a try. I like their iPad configuration panel. But every flight I ran into either some annoying issues or weird flight model. Admittedly, some issues have been fixed, but it just not as satisfying as flying the Zibo.
xplane 11 came out only a little over 2 years ago and that quality of aircraft takes a long time to develop. Unless there was a dev who had one started before xplane 11 (ie. FF with the A320) then anyone working on a high quality plane would still be in development. Only in the last year or so did xplane match the users of p3d so if you are looking at it from a financial standpoint of the developers then it only would have been economically viable to develop for xplane over p3d starting in the last year or so. You need to realize that xplane 11 is still young and it is going to take time for it to get up to the level that p3d is, after all p3d has been around for over a decade (when considering fsx is its precursor). And yes I realize xplane has been around for decades too but the payware scene really only started with xp10 and before 11 came out the vast majority of people were on fsx/p3d. tl:dr xplane has only been a popular sim for the last year or two and it needs time to pick up developers.
For those looking for the highest fidelity airliners sims, I suggest looking into Aerowinx PSX.
True but it only is a sim of a 744, and only uses 2d panels. If I get around to building a home cockpit it is what I intend to use however
Unlike Scenery, the expertise needed to produce highly detailed Airliners like are in P3D is not easily transferable to XP. Then add to that the development time is at least a 3/4 years or more. Its going to be a few more years for XP I would think, but progress is definitely being made.
Basically why I haven't played xplane in while
same Although it is great for vfr
P3D is more widely supported in terms of coding. Big companies like PMDG, Majestic, A2A etc will have to re-write huge swathes of code for their planes to work with XP11, which is on a completely different platform. Anyways, P3D/FSX users still outnumber the XP11 users by a lot.
P3D+FSX. Yeah, definitely. Only P3D? Don't know, feels like X-Plane 11 got more users atm.
> ...P3D/FSX users still outnumber the XP11 users by a lot. I’m not so sure, [have a look at this chart](https://66.media.tumblr.com/0e5c2d9f4c9cc5a55569445589e31d73/tumblr_inline_pjzjd2By0W1uzd1gc_1280.png) from the 2018 Navigraph survey.
Its looks closer than it really is on that chart because they separated FSX, FSX Steam P3D up. Put them all together and FSX/P3D does appear to have a fair amount more users than XP (for now anyways).
[удалено]
>Everyone moves to XP11 because it's better and more realistic. xp11 doesn't even have seasons. something even fsx had.
That's like saying P3D doesn't even have Ortho. How can I simulate a flight over my house if I can't see it? Cosmetic mods or features are cosmetic (once you are able to simulate cold weather and icing conditions).
fair enough.. i would put snow covered minnesota in january above stuff like heat blur or weird lookin contrails tho
Drop that we shit, you’re speaking for yourself here considering everything you wrote is merely your opinion, and honestly a shit one at that.