Jump to content

"concorde Lite" - An Idea?


Recommended Posts


Dear FSLabs-community,

I am a passionate Concorde-fan, and this is my first post in this forum.

In the past, I have been using the formidable SSTSIM-Concorde for FS9. However, as I made a switch to FSX this year, I was sad that the SSTSIM version could no longer be used with FSX.

Of course, I knew that a separate, improved version of Concorde existed for FSX - your FSLabs Concorde-X!

With the level of interest for this airplane, one would think that I should not hesitate for a second and buy it - but I have been reluctant to do so yet and I came to the conclusion that I will stick with FS9 and SSTSIM for a while.

The reason for this is not only that this product is a little pricey (that's the least concern), but because it is very resource hungry (and I don't have a powerful computer - yet some add-on airplanes run well, such as Level-D 767) and - honestly - too complex to handle without an extensive time commitment in form of reading manuals and practicing.

The SSTSIM-Concorde is already extremely complex, yet it is claimed that Concorde-X is 3 times as complex!

This is not to discredit this product or the efforts that you have put into programming it - without having flown it, I believe you have done an excellent job modelling the cockpits, systems and flight dynamics as accurately as possible, and these achievements should be applauded. However, I am wondering whether it is reasonable to expect an airplane to be handled by one sim pilot that was once handled by three crew members who had the highest experience and skill level that any pilot could have, without the sim pilot encountering some major frustrations even with an activated VFE.

The point I want to make is this: I personally believe that it would be a good idea (and marketing strategy) to develop a "Concorde Lite" - version (besides the currently sold "Professional Edition") with considerably reduced system complexity (to the necessities, maybe at a level below SSTSIM), yet with the same exterior model, flight dymanics and panel layouts. I am certain that this would be a perfect fit for many simmers like me who are concerned about buying Concorde-X due to the toll on hardware and the fact that it can take many many hours to study the manual and complete a flight preparation. I assume that it requires less work for the developers to "downgrade" a complex version to a simpler one than developing a completely new product.

A Concorde-Lite version would essentially hit two birds with one stone: First, it would appeal to the consumers who prefer less complex systems, yet enjoy flying the plane (and if we talk about less complex in the case of Concorde, it is still way more complex than most sophisticated freeware-add-ons). Secondly - and this is very significant - it would make the airplane more framerate-friendly and less memory-consuming. That way users could prop up their scenery settings and enjoy practicing landings at busy airports with less risk of getting OOM's. And those who have mastered the basics would have an option to upgrade to the professional edition that deserves this name.

Not that I expect you to work on a "Concorde-Lite", since you are currently busy with Airbus X - but I just wanted to express an idea as a consumer and to read what others may think about it. If such a version came out, I would definitely be one of the first buyers!

Feel free to share your thoughts on this!

Link to post
Kyprianos Biris

Dear afterburner I went through the exact process you are now. I was a happy FS9 user with all add ons perfectly in place insalled wondering about taking the big step. FSLabs Concrode and a couple of amazing sceneries was the reason I took the step.

The FSLabs Concorde lite you mention EXISTS. Its the subject product with simply a couple of options ticked. These are the options where you let the virtual Flight Engineer do all the job for you except of the flying part. That is how I started. Then I found out that there is A LOT of knowledge I already had from FS9 and SSTSim. That was a tremendous help for me for a "quick start up". Then as soon as I realized how much better is the FSLabs Concrode by simulating every single bit of this wonderful aircraft (that SSTSIm was not and I thought it did) I never looked back again.

Yes it does involve a cost and this is not about FSLabs. Its about the lovely sceneries that are available for FSX and you will not be able to resist in buying them as time passes by.

The abilities of FSX are simply non comparable when it comes to graphics.

The only "problem" I face is the high demand of memory from FSLab Concorde in the combination of departure and arrival heavy add on scenery. It is still manageable but on the limit.

This is/was my only issue, nothing else. I explain in the recent post about OOMs how I manage it.

Take the plunge, don't hesitate. In the beginning just leave the vfe do all the job. Soon you'll realize that you know most of them.

Link to post
Jean L. Leborne

[...] without the sim pilot encountering some major frustrations even with an activated VFE.

No place for frustration with Concorde-X ! just the place for still-growing rewards...

If you can fly the SSTSIM, no doubt you can fly the Concorde-X (putting apart your PC specs)

A "Concorde lite" will no longer be a Concorde from my point of vue

Link to post
  • Create New...