Timeline of FSLabs projects

[Sabri Khezzane]

Hello guys

I would to know if it’s possible, more about the timeline/schedules for new projects please ?

I wait for a long courrier ideally A380, but A350 or A330 will be also great.

Is there a project planned for 2020 ? 
 

Of course, if it’s confidential I can understand it

[Sabine Meier]

2 minutes ago, Sabri Khezzane said:

Hello guys

I would to know if it’s possible, more about the timeline/schedules for new projects please ?

I wait for a long courrier ideally A380, but A350 or A330 will be also great.

Is there a project planned for 2020 ? 
 

Of course, if it’s confidential I can understand it

for 2020 we have the sharklets plus some other goodies involved like new FMGS software rev. i dont think we see anything else this year apart from maybe an statement regarding the new sim when that is out. the rest is all under nda i would think so myself.

[Sabri Khezzane]

Thank you for quick reply and your honest response

It’s much appreciated.

I had a dream with a FSLabs A380, but maybe for the next sim (fs2020 I assume)

cheers 

[NilsUnger]

There is also that "leaked" tablet, that could hold lots of interesting features.

[Hugh Morten]

Please drum up support for a Concorde reboot! Come on simmers, do it!

[Sabine Meier]

10 minutes ago, Hugh Morten said:

Please drum up support for a Concorde reboot! Come on simmers, do it!

Why now. First let Microsoft release fs2020 then have fslabs release a statement regarding updates.

Personally i find concord not interesting at all. Of course it is an interesting aircraft but not one that i like to fly in my sim.

[Artur Araripe]

Tbh,  A320neo or A330 > Concorde reboot. Let it go. It hasn't flown irl for nearly two decades now. Time to move on  

 

 

[David Norfolk]

i'm honest, i reckon

Sharklets P3D V4

MSFS2020 (A32X) Updates (if planned)

Concorde V2 (P3D) & Maybe 2020 or vice versa 

A3XX (MSFS 2020) maybe P3D 

[Abdulkarim Abdulmoti]

Are we having DCDUs in the smaller buses any soon?

[Hugh Morten]

Why would you not wish to fly the Concorde? Genuine question. It's absolutely fantastic. 

I completely accept that it's your hard earned cash - and you choose how to spend both money and your spare time. I do really like the FSL A320 - fantastic simulation and very enjoyable.

But nothing beats a Concorde take off and hand flying through the sound barrier. So what if it hasn't flown for 20 years- you get to go from LHR to JFK in 3.5 hours. Why sit for 7 or 8 hours in the cockpit of even a highly realistic A330/A350/A380?

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

[Sabine Meier]

5 minutes ago, Abdulkarim Abdulmoti said:

Are we having DCDUs in the smaller buses any soon?

yes. if you check the sharklets hype thread you see the answer from Andrew regarding the dcdu on the smaller busses.

[Christoph Sebek]

IIRC they sent out a query some years ago asking whether you would actually purchase a Concorde if made for P3D. You had to set up a reply email with a specific title and content to let them know your personal decision. So pending on the returns, it's either yay or Nay. Never heard anything thereafter about it though.

[David Norfolk]

54 minutes ago, Christoph Sebek said:

IIRC they sent out a query some years ago asking whether you would actually purchase a Concorde if made for P3D. You had to set up a reply email with a specific title and content to let them know your personal decision. So pending on the returns, it's either yay or Nay. Never heard anything thereafter about it though.

"The Concorde-X for 64-bit is now officially on pause. While we received some strong support from customers regarding future sales on P3Dv4, we have to ensure that we align our business model with the significant development news that we received from Microsoft, and since the aircraft is so specialized, we prefer to evaluate further once there are more details on the new platform"

[Hugh Morten]

Bit like the real thing, Concorde-X has a small contingent of crazy keen fans who love it whilst the rest of the world has moved on. I am not holding out too much hope there will be a re-boot for FS2020. 

A330 + A350 +/- A380 = $$$$$$$$$$$ for the company

Concorde = $

[Ray Proudfoot]

3 hours ago, Hugh Morten said:

Why would you not wish to fly the Concorde? Genuine question. It's absolutely fantastic. 

I completely accept that it's your hard earned cash - and you choose how to spend both money and your spare time. I do really like the FSL A320 - fantastic simulation and very enjoyable.

But nothing beats a Concorde take off and hand flying through the sound barrier. So what if it hasn't flown for 20 years- you get to go from LHR to JFK in 3.5 hours. Why sit for 7 or 8 hours in the cockpit of even a highly realistic A330/A350/A380?

Imagine if Concorde had just been built and had glass cockpit. With its looks I’m sure people would be demanding one in flight sim. With those looks how could you not be bowled over?

The fact it’s not flying any more is irrelevant. The Spitfire sells well as do other aircraft not flying any more. The 747 will be withdrawn from service over the coming years but demand will remain high.

I suspect the main reason people shy away is the assumed complexity in setting her up for a flight. It’s not more difficult, just different. And as FSL said... it’s on pause, not cancelled.

I flew her from LAX to Honolulu yesterday. 2h 26m from throttles forward to wheels down. Less than half the time it would take an Airbus. 

[Rafal Haczek]

36 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Less than half the time it would take an Airbus. 

Half time less fun, Ray!

[Ray Proudfoot]

16 minutes ago, Rafal Haczek said:

Half time less fun, Ray!

Not if the aircraft is turned round and flown back to LAX. And I’ll be back in LAX and in a pub whilst you’re still outbound.  I’ll wave as I pass you at Mach 2.8. 

[Atul Mishra]

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Not if the aircraft is turned round and flown back to LAX. And I’ll be back in LAX and in a pub whilst you’re still outbound.  I’ll wave as I pass you at Mach 2.8. 

Would you even see him from 60,000ft.? 

[Christoph Sebek]

12 hours ago, David Norfolk said:

"The Concorde-X for 64-bit is now officially on pause. While we received some strong support from customers regarding future sales on P3Dv4, we have to ensure that we align our business model with the significant development news that we received from Microsoft, and since the aircraft is so specialized, we prefer to evaluate further once there are more details on the new platform"

Ah. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

6 hours ago, Atul Mishra said:

Would you even see him from 60,000ft.? 

Concorde rarely reached that altitude. Average would be around FL580. Bear in mind an Airbus / Boeing will be around FL380 so you're only talking 20,000ft. Easily visible when factoring in a contrail. But I probably wouldn't see the pilot!

[Norman Blackburn]

12 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I’ll wave as I pass you at Mach 2.8. 

Time compression @Ray Proudfoot?  

[John Barnes]

@Ray Proudfoot 2.8?

[Robert Sutherland]

These threads often turn into arguments about what the company should do, with people demanding that one project takes priority over another. 

I'd personally love to see a new Concorde in 64bit glory. But then I'd also be a huge fan of a widebody Airbus, too.

It's possible that FSLabs could work on both concurrently, especially since the foundations of an Airbus widebody's systems are already developed in the guise of the A320's systems. They do share significant commonality. 

As for the Concorde, it's just a matter of waiting to see what FS2020 requires. The fact that FS2020 is still based on Microsoft's ESP engine is going to be a big help, I think. It should make transitioning from one platform to another simpler. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

22 minutes ago, Norman Blackburn said:

Time compression @Ray Proudfoot?  

If I'm flying at Mach 2 and the Airbus is doing Mach 0.80 in the opposite direction then it is Mach 2.8. Remember I'll be flying back to LAX while the Airbus is still outbound to Honolulu.

[Norman Blackburn]

I will give you that - well played Ray.

[John Barnes]

Surely you would be doing 2.2 @Ray Proudfoot giving you a closure speed of 3.0 if the bus is doing 0.8?

[Ray Proudfoot]

Just now, John Barnes said:

Surely you would be doing 2.2 @Ray Proudfoot giving you a closure speed of 3.0 if the bus is doing 0.8?

I monitor Concorde's speed with a LUA script running on a WideFS PC. The highest Mach speed I've seen is Mach 2.03. Was it even capable of Mach 2.2? Hmmm.

[John Barnes]

Meant 02. I stand corrected.

[NilsUnger]

Ray definitely knows his Concorde very well! 

It's a very interesting aircraft, for me too. If I would prefer it over a widebody airbus, I'm not sure. BUT I would totally accept to wait for a widebody airbus if the team decides to do a Concorde again. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

@NilsUnger, I love it primarily because it's a beautiful looking aircraft. Now as much as the A380 is impressive because of its size it could hardly be classed as beautiful. But I accept that some will se it that way as it's a purely subjective thing.

What is also interesting is that all the knowledge you have about autopilots, VNAV, LNAV and reduced take-offs goes out of the window with Concorde. All take-offs - irrespective of distance to be flown - are full throttle plus reheats. That in itself make takeoffs very exciting. No flaps so you have to go like a bat out of hell to get to Vr with a heavy load. With 90T on fuel and Vr of 190kts it uses up around 9000ft of EGLL's 12,000ft runways. What's the A380 equivalent to JFK?

Then you have the descent. Slow down first and then engage a shallow descent before the serious stuff starts. Descending at 4000-5000fpm at Mach 1.5 increases to 7000-8000fpm below Mach 1. How can that not excite you compared to the gentle 2,000fpm of Airbuses. Then you have to land it with no flaps! It's lots of fun!

[Paul Parkin]

12 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@NilsUnger, I love it primarily because it's a beautiful looking aircraft. Now as much as the A380 is impressive because of its size it could hardly be classed as beautiful. But I accept that some will se it that way as it's a purely subjective thing.

What is also interesting is that all the knowledge you have about autopilots, VNAV, LNAV and reduced take-offs goes out of the window with Concorde. All take-offs - irrespective of distance to be flown - are full throttle plus reheats. That in itself make takeoffs very exciting. No flaps so you have to go like a bat out of hell to get to Vr with a heavy load. With 90T on fuel and Vr of 190kts it uses up around 9000ft of EGLL's 12,000ft runways. What's the A380 equivalent to JFK?

Then you have the descent. Slow down first and then engage a shallow descent before the serious stuff starts. Descending at 4000-5000fpm at Mach 1.5 increases to 7000-8000fpm below Mach 1. How can that not excite you compared to the gentle 2,000fpm of Airbuses. Then you have to land it with no flaps! It's lots of fun!

We'll likely not know for a while as BA doesn't operate the A380 to Kennedy sadly! T7 doesn't have any ICAO code F gates as far as I know.