Found this when starting the FSLabs Control Center...

[Steve Prowse]

2 hours ago, Thiago Braun said:

Hopefully this will be available on MSFS one day. I fear that, by the time this product is released, there will be very few people left still using P3D, especially now that PMDG is finally unleashing their 737. 

Without doubt P3D is now considered by many developers as dead in the water, sales for them have vanished.  Why would anyone buy P3D a simulator which has had its day?   For ten years I’ve used FSL’s Concorde X, and still do.  The question is then; would I buy P3D knowing full well that the only aircraft I’ll ever buy for it is the new version Concorde?  Sorry to say no, it’s just not worth it, if I think that how about new simmers?  They wouldn’t even consider it.  This new FSL Concorde has a very limited customer base, no question about it.  I too wait for FSL to start to develop aircraft for the new flightsim MSFS; surely they must?

[Jose Rodrigues]

But is it possible to make a credible Concorde for MSFS? I mean, with INS and everything....

And by the way, if MSFS has the "brand new" 737 (P3D has the complete fleet of the same plane and from two or three developers), Prepar3D has EVERYTHING ELSE... except visuals (even then, it depends on personal taste).

But this thread is about Concorde... sorry.

[Ray Proudfoot]

43 minutes ago, Steve Prowse said:

 I too wait for FSL to start to develop aircraft for the new flightsim MSFS; surely they must?

I’m surprised at you Steve. MSFS is like a very attractive female but with so many flaws you would never marry her. But taking her to the pub to show her off to your mates is fine. In other words, she looks great but is a bit shallow. Just like MSFS.

My apologies if I’ve offended the sensitivities of anyone.  But I was brought up in the 70s when being politically correct hadn’t even been thought of. Happy days eh?

[Ray Proudfoot]

43 minutes ago, Jose Rodrigues said:

But is it possible to make a credible Concorde for MSFS? I mean, with INS and everything....

As things stand now, no. Lat / lon cannot be inserted into a flight plan so an INS cannot be created.

Even if it was possible I don’t see FSL developing for MSFS for many years if ever. They always said they would only make one 64-bit version of Concorde.

And when you’re flying such a fast aircraft when do you get the time to admire the view? In short, you don’t. Once you’re over the ocean and supersonic where are the advantages in MSFS? Even at lower altitudes your speed doesn’t exactly help looking at the view.

There is a Concorde available now for MSFS but it’s heavily compromised.

[Steve Prowse]

Point is Ray every version of MS flightsim I’ve owned has had its flaws, like you Ray I go back a long time.  I’ve clearly said MSFS is the future of our hobby.  Developers have already abandoned the sinking ship that is P3D, MSFS will continue to grow anddevelop.  Let’s not forget just whose shoulders P3D stand on.  It seems FSL have nailed their colours to the wrong mast, for reasons best known to themselves.  Like times gone by Ray simmers are in denial, slowly though most will move to MSFS.

 

[Steve Prowse]

5 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Even if it was possible I don’t see FSL developing for MSFS for many years if ever.

Then they will sink Ray, it just doesn’t make sense not to develop for the new platform, they have always moved with the times. I recall being told when we were begging them to continue with Concorde being told sentimentality does not put food on the plate, remember?

[Ray Proudfoot]

8 minutes ago, Steve Prowse said:

Then they will sink Ray, it just doesn’t make sense not to develop for the new platform, they have always moved with the times. I recall being told when we were begging them to continue with Concorde being told sentimentality does not put food on the plate, remember?

There’s no chance until the SDK is complete and Asobo / Microsoft are dragging their heels over that. Plus these massive forced updates need to end. It’s still in beta as far as I’m concerned.

FSL may well have a change of mind but when you consider how much has been changed for a platform they’re familiar with can you begin to imagine how long it would take for a MSFS Concorde? The Airbus series will take priority anyway. It will be 10 years for a Concorde and bear in mind Microsoft said MSFS is a 10 year project for them. That’s now down to eight.

Imagine if they walk away like they did in 2009. What then?

[Ray Proudfoot]

17 minutes ago, Steve Prowse said:

Point is Ray every version of MS flightsim I’ve owned has had its flaws, like you Ray I go back a long time.  I’ve clearly said MSFS is the future of our hobby.  Developers have already abandoned the sinking ship that is P3D, MSFS will continue to develop.  It seems FSL have nailed their colours to the wrong mast, for reasons best known to themselves.  Like times gone by Ray simmers are in denial, slowly though most will move to MSFS.

Have people abandoned X-Plane? Don’t think so. There’s still plenty left just as there are for P3D.

And given LM’s resources would you rule out a streaming version? I wouldn’t.

I don’t understand this “P3D is dead” thing. You can have both. MSFS for low-level IFR and P3D for IFR. What’s the advantage of MSFS when it’s overcast?

I’m not in denial but I’d be a bloody fool to throw away all the money invested in P3D. Does MSFS make you a better pilot? Of course not.

[Fraser Gale]

Any chance we could just be enthusiastic for the future, going on the bits of information that Andrew has provided, rather than again discussing the which sim is best thing?
 

 When all said and done, only FSLabs can decide which way they choose to take their business and we just have to hope it gives as many people the enjoyment they deserve in an otherwise rather depressing world, as well as continuing the memory of the great technological achievement that Concorde was. 

[Craig Baillie]

1 hour ago, Steve Prowse said:

Without doubt P3D is now considered by many developers as dead in the water, sales for them have vanished.  Why would anyone buy P3D a simulator which has had its day?   For ten years I’ve used FSL’s Concorde X, and still do.  The question is then; would I buy P3D knowing full well that the only aircraft I’ll ever buy for it is the new version Concorde?  Sorry to say no, it’s just not worth it, if I think that how about new simmers?  They wouldn’t even consider it.  This new FSL Concorde has a very limited customer base, no question about it.  I too wait for FSL to start to develop aircraft for the new flightsim MSFS; surely they must?

I disagree with the sentiment that developers consider P3D dead. FSL, Qualitywings, TFDI, PMDG, Majestic etc are all actively developing. 
 

Fact of the matter is right now, in this moment of time, MSFS does not offer the fidelity that we have with P3D and those that came before it.

It looks like it will be a long road before we get there with MSFS. It’s a beautiful sim, no doubt, but in nearly every other way it’s inferior. Just now.

PMDG is currently in a lowering expectations PR game with their upcoming release. Who’d have thought we’d see a time when they would use the words ‘early adopter’? A term often criticised in the past with other developers.

It is precisely this that I applaud everyone else for keeping quiet on their plans until they have something to share.

I’ve said this before: developers owe us nothing except what we’ve paid for. Getting riled up only serves to get one’s blood pressure up for no reason.

Enjoy flying what we have, enjoy the range of products and platforms we can choose from and look forward to what we will have in the future.

 

[Will Fibich]

8 hours ago, Andrew Wilson said:

We are simulating the entire flight, from the first line of the Safety Checklist before power up to the last line on the Engineer's Leaving Panel Checklist. This includes the different engine starting procedures used at various departure points, ex base/into base procedures and the entire boarding and refueling process. It's a similar experience to that which our A320 customers are familiar with - only we've taken this further. 

Would this title work really nicely with GSX, as does the A32X?

Also, could you touch on the different starting procedures crews would use? I'm not too familiar with that. 

[Alex Lund]

As told, there will be flight planner for flights. Is it able to plan fights that were not "concorde flights?" For example EFHK-ENGM? Concorde will be my main aircraft when we get it and I would love to fly it also on short routes that are not supersonic. 

[Andrew Wilson]

Hi Alex,

Yes - you'll be able to build your own routes that you can then export and load into our Concorde planning system. We have included the real world routes as the data can be quite difficult to source. 

8 minutes ago, Will Fibich said:

Would this title work really nicely with GSX, as does the A32X?

Yes, it is fully integrated with GSX.

I've had quite an interest in film emulation these past few years - and love trying to make my screenshots resemble photos from the era of film. Here's a shot I snapped of Alpha Delta fueling up at Barbados this week after a morning rain shower. 

 

[Will Fibich]

7 minutes ago, Andrew Wilson said:

Hi Alex,

Yes - you'll be able to build your own routes that you can then export and load into our Concorde planning system. We have included the real world routes as the data can be quite difficult to source. 

Yes, it is fully integrated with GSX.

I've had quite an interest in film emulation these past few years - and love trying to make my screenshots resemble photos from the era of film. Here's a shot I snapped of Alpha Delta fueling up at Barbados this week after a morning rain shower. 

 

Looks amazing, Andrew! Thank you for answering all of our questions. 

[Fraser Gale]

44 minutes ago, Craig Baillie said:

 

I’ve said this before: developers owe us nothing except what we’ve paid for. Getting riled up only serves to get one’s blood pressure up for no reason.

 

Exactly! 
 

I too have said this many, many times.

[Will Fibich]

Was that by chance taken when I caught you headed out to Heathrow? @Andrew Wilson

[Andrew Wilson]

5 minutes ago, Will Fibich said:

Was that by chance taken when I caught you headed out to Heathrow? @Andrew Wilson

Hi WIll - ah no, I was in Alpha Fox that night. We've been doing a few BGI runs lately as we needed to run some scenarios past some ex-crews with regards to the use of HLI and the resulting PTOBO values. All fixed now 

We've also been flying in groups online on the Vatsim network. At the moment, we enjoy planning trips back to Heathrow and using the Concorde planning system to work out an ETA for Ockham. We then depart different airfields and see how close the flights are together when we hit OCK.

Last night, it was between the BA98 from YYZ, BA272 from BGI and BA9515E from YQX. The YYZ flight was a couple of minutes ahead - but the BGI and YQX flights both arrived at OCK within 15 seconds of each other. Amazing, considering we were using real world weather, different payloads, different airframes and different routes. 

It's such a fun aircraft to fly.

[duartevieira]

1 hour ago, Andrew Wilson said:

Hi Alex,

Yes - you'll be able to build your own routes that you can then export and load into our Concorde planning system. We have included the real world routes as the data can be quite difficult to source. 

Yes, it is fully integrated with GSX.

I've had quite an interest in film emulation these past few years - and love trying to make my screenshots resemble photos from the era of film. Here's a shot I snapped of Alpha Delta fueling up at Barbados this week after a morning rain shower. 

 

How can people say that p3d is dead just look at that beauty bring it on and that neo as well you will always have my support I doont buy games or sims to look at the terrain from 35000 ft 

[Vimal Anandharaman]

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but with regards to the INS, will it be something that has been coded in-house? Also with regards to weather radar, will both variants be simulated ? Thank you!

[Andrew Wilson]

1 hour ago, Vimal Anandharaman said:

Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but with regards to the INS, will it be something that has been coded in-house? Also with regards to weather radar, will both variants be simulated ? Thank you!

Hi Vimal, 

Yes - the INS is included. You will not be required to download anything else. 

The weather radar we've simulated is the Bendix RDR4B which was fitted to the BA fleet in 2001.  

[Ray Proudfoot]

6 minutes ago, Andrew Wilson said:

The weather radar we've simulated is the Bendix RDR4B which was fitted to the BA fleet in 2001.  

Does that require Active Sky to be installed Andrew?

[Andrew Wilson]

8 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Does that require Active Sky to be installed Andrew?

Yes it does.

[Will Fibich]

3 hours ago, Andrew Wilson said:

Yes, it is fully integrated with GSX.

The whole sequence with GSX and the use of the ATSU system flows very nicely. Obviously Concorde doesn't have that system, but is the integration similar to the A32X? I'm not sure how to word my question, maybe, will you receive information in accordance with what GSX is doing? Like, get your final load figures as the door is about to be closed up (if this stuff is simulated). Hope that makes sense. 

[julian schotting]

looking foward to the v5 version still have fsx steam edition installed just for the concorde 

[Steve Prowse]

12 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

don’t understand this “P3D is dead” thing.

Meaning Ray developers are not selling P3D add-ons, sales have vanished....they are not making any money; no food on their plates .  Please don't even try to tell me FSL are not in the business of making money.  There is room for P3D, XP and MSFS; what i completely fail to understand, since day one, why all the hate for MSFS?  Remember P3D= Microsoft FSX, no Microsoft FSX you wouldn't even have P3D.  Do you think LM would have ever developed their own fight simulation platform?  Nah I don't think so.  Oh and thanks for all your very helpful posts over on AVSIM with regards to DCD Concorde.  Many new Concorde pilots have benefited from your knowledge and experience with Concorde.

Anyway take care one and all I hope FSL new version Concorde is a massive success for them.  Now it's a good time for me to bail out from here...nothing more to say or add.  cheers

[Thiago Braun]

13 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Have people abandoned X-Plane? Don’t think so. There’s still plenty left just as there are for P3D.

And given LM’s resources would you rule out a streaming version? I wouldn’t.

I don’t understand this “P3D is dead” thing. You can have both. MSFS for low-level IFR and P3D for IFR. What’s the advantage of MSFS when it’s overcast?

I’m not in denial but I’d be a bloody fool to throw away all the money invested in P3D. Does MSFS make you a better pilot? Of course not.

X-Plane is a different story. Currently I still use it only because there is a lot you can do with it without spending too much (just like MSFS). I also have thousands of Euros spent in P3D, but I just cannot justify keeping it up-to-date. With PMDG, Maddog and the A310 being released and with the FBW evolving at a rapid pace (for free), there is just no point in investing in P3D, unfortunately.

IFR in MSFS has come a long way too. Yesterday I was doing an IFR flight on the H145 with the Garmin GTNXi and navigating through terrain in zero visibility and then experiencing the glorious landscape outside the beautiful wall of clouds, just to land in a forgotten farm somewhere in Colorado was just a sublime experience. Unfortunately those that have never actually tried MSFS will never be able to comprehend how much better the flying experience is.

Back to the topic: I am sure that the smart developers from FSL would be able to find ways to circumvent MSFS's (evolving) SDK limitations. I have just bought the glorious Boeing 247D and it has morse code radio navigation based on radio towers that were not included in the sim and also a physics engine built outside MSFS. That costed me 17 Euros!

 

[Ray Proudfoot]

2 hours ago, Steve Prowse said:

There is room for P3D, XP and MSFS; what i completely fail to understand, since day one, why all the hate for MSFS?  Remember P3D= Microsoft FSX, no Microsoft FSX you wouldn't even have P3D.  Do you think LM would have ever developed their own fight simulation platform?  Nah I don't think so.

Hello Steve. I’ve never hated MSFS. Its biggest problem was it was rushed out after such a short beta test. I suspect they were reacting to P3D v5. Given the number of huge forced updates that just confirmed it was released far too early. The SDK is still far from complete meaning 3rd party developers have struggled to create stable addons airports excepted.

Remember Microsoft exited flight sim without warning and there’s no guarantee they won’t do the same again. Two companies developing a sim is unprecedented and has caused problems as we both know.

2 hours ago, Steve Prowse said:

Oh and thanks for all your very helpful posts over on AVSIM with regards to DCD Concorde.  Many new Concorde pilots have benefited from your knowledge and experience with Concorde.

Thanks. My love of the aircraft is undiminished.

I’m sorry to see you departing this group. Take care.

[Ray Proudfoot]

@Thiago Braun, I have tried MSFS and agree that the scenery is fantastic. I will probably buy it but only for VFR flights. Most of my flying is IFR because I enjoy flying to different airports in reasonably short time and at those altitudes the scenery is of secondary importance to monitoring my aircraft systems and seeing other Ai that AIG gives me. Yes, that is now available for MSFS but is still problematic.

My GoFlight modules need a lot of work to get them working with MSFS and I don’t have the enthusiasm to get into that.

XP has always been for the pilot who enjoys superb flight models. Sounds like you’ll still be using it.

[Fraser Gale]

Anybody who loves Concorde enough to want to learn to fly her properly, which without offence to Andrew or FSLabs you couldn’t totally do with the current Concorde X, I think will make sure they are in a position to buy and use the new version.  
 

Those that are happy to jump in and go and think they are flying a Concorde properly when maybe they aren’t having to, can use other versions to their hearts content and still have a story or two to tell in their local pub.  From the bits of information that Andrew has shared now, I think it is obvious that like the Airbus series, this simulation will be second to none and accessible for the most demanding sim pilot (like me) or the hobbyist who wants to fly it without a huge learning curve.  It does sound like she’ll be less forgiving though, and those Concorde enthusiasts that have read the more honest books about the real thing that are out there should see this as being more true to life. 
 

There is no argument for keeping it close to how a previous version worked so that it is easier for people to “convert” onto the new version because people continually change to different aircraft in the sim world anyway, and the which simulator is best debate should also be a secondary point if you are a person who wants to find out what it was like to fly a Concorde realistically.  

Start reading the real manuals folks! 

[Robert Sutherland]

5 hours ago, Steve Prowse said:

Meaning Ray developers are not selling P3D add-ons, sales have vanished....they are not making any money; no food on their plates .  Please don't even try to tell me FSL are not in the business of making money.  There is room for P3D, XP and MSFS; what i completely fail to understand, since day one, why all the hate for MSFS?  Remember P3D= Microsoft FSX, no Microsoft FSX you wouldn't even have P3D.  Do you think LM would have ever developed their own fight simulation platform?  Nah I don't think so.  Oh and thanks for all your very helpful posts over on AVSIM with regards to DCD Concorde.  Many new Concorde pilots have benefited from your knowledge and experience with Concorde.

Anyway take care one and all I hope FSL new version Concorde is a massive success for them.  Now it's a good time for me to bail out from here...nothing more to say or add.  cheers

By the same extension, we wouldn't have MSFS without P3D. Lockheed Martin filled a huge void by taking the original FSX platform, turning it into a 64bit one, and modernising it. Microsoft saw the popularity of simming and saw it as an opportunity to return to the market. Those who now write P3D off completely are doing so without appreciating what it still has to offer, and its potential for further development. 

 

[Troy Kretzul]

23 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

But with a major drawback making Concorde flights around the world impossible for me.

Asobo will not permit 3rd parties access to the weather engine making historical weather an impossibility. So if I wish to depart LAX to Honolulu at 10:00 my time I’m using the weather at 02:00 local. With P3D and Active Sky I can set the sim to 10:00 LAX for yesterday and get accurate weather.

The alternative is to wait until 6pm my time for the 10:00 LAX weather which is a non-starter for me.

The other obvious drawback to MSFS is the inability to set lat/lon so an INS could not be used. That may change but I’ll never consider MSFS as anything other than low-level simulator where the scenery is stunning.

The same issue is also not permitting PMDG to simulate a wx radar are on the initial release of their 737; however, Asobo as confirmed that they are opening up the weather engine to 3rd parties. I believe it's actually the most requested feature at the moment, so I imagine historic weather will come eventually, maybe even before FSLabs would be in a position to release Concorde for MSFS.

[Thiago Braun]

2 hours ago, Troy Kretzul said:

The same issue is also not permitting PMDG to simulate a wx radar are on the initial release of their 737; however, Asobo as confirmed that they are opening up the weather engine to 3rd parties. I believe it's actually the most requested feature at the moment, so I imagine historic weather will come eventually, maybe even before FSLabs would be in a position to release Concorde for MSFS.

Historic weather is a very niche functionality that is not, as far as I understand, what is preventing FSL from developing a Concorde for MSFS. 

The INS navigation system, on the other hand, might be a blocker.

Building things outside the sim is nothing new, though (Majestic has done that on P3D). Having some programming experience, I think it would be doable to develop an INS system without relying on APIs from MSFS. I mean, the position of the aircraft is known and can be shared via SimConnect. A similar approach like TDS has taken with their GTN would possibly apply here.

[Ray Proudfoot]

3 hours ago, Troy Kretzul said:

however, Asobo as confirmed that they are opening up the weather engine to 3rd parties. I believe it's actually the most requested feature at the moment, so I imagine historic weather will come eventually, maybe even before FSLabs would be in a position to release Concorde for MSFS.

Asobo are opening up the weather engine to 3rd parties? Really? Do you have a source for that?

[Alex Pugh]

18 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Asobo are opening up the weather engine to 3rd parties? Really? Do you have a source for that?

They are not, he's just misunderstanding their plans to allow 3rd parties to read weather, not control it.

[Ray Proudfoot]

7 minutes ago, Alex Pugh said:

They are not, he's just misunderstanding their plans to allow 3rd parties to read weather, not control it.

Thanks. That confirms my understanding of the situation.

[Ramón Cutanda]

On 4/23/2022 at 7:05 AM, Steve Prowse said:

why all the hate for MSFS?

In my own particular case, I love MSFS graphics, I hate the interface. Maybe it is simply that I am a dog too old to learn new tricks but I just cannot get used to not having 2D panel pop-ups and right-click context menus. And, besides, why change all the shortcuts, for no reason, that we have been using for years on end? I have felt clumsy and uncomfortable since minute one. I only consider MSFS for VFR flights and, most of the time, I end up using the external view. That make my flights more "sightseeing" than proper simulation monitoring constantly all the indicators. Therefore, I have always had the feeling that MSFS is more a videogame, in its recreational sense, than a simulation, in the educational sense.

Regards.

[John Price]

On 4/22/2022 at 6:51 PM, Andrew Wilson said:

Hi WIll - ah no, I was in Alpha Fox that night. We've been doing a few BGI runs lately as we needed to run some scenarios past some ex-crews with regards to the use of HLI and the resulting PTOBO values. All fixed now 

We've also been flying in groups online on the Vatsim network. At the moment, we enjoy planning trips back to Heathrow and using the Concorde planning system to work out an ETA for Ockham. We then depart different airfields and see how close the flights are together when we hit OCK.

Last night, it was between the BA98 from YYZ, BA272 from BGI and BA9515E from YQX. The YYZ flight was a couple of minutes ahead - but the BGI and YQX flights both arrived at OCK within 15 seconds of each other. Amazing, considering we were using real world weather, different payloads, different airframes and different routes. 

It's such a fun aircraft to fly.

Can I ask what HLI and PTOBO mean, just out of interest?

[Andrew Wilson]

3 hours ago, John Price said:

Can I ask what HLI and PTOBO mean, just out of interest?

High Level Index - it's where they were permitted to add a small amount of extra fuel into each fuel tank to increase the range. 

Pre-TakeOff Burn Off - this was where the ramp CG was aft of the required takeoff CG and fuel had to be moved from Tank 11 into the collector tanks - but fuel had to first be 'burned' from the collector tanks as they were full. The other procedure used was the Pre-TakeOff Transfer (PTOTR) which was used when the ramp CG was forward of the required takeoff CG, and fuel was moved from Tank 9 into Tank 11. 

Our Concorde Planning System works all of this out - and you'll see the results on the loadsheet.

[Troy Kretzul]

20 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Thanks. That confirms my understanding of the situation.

Apologies for getting your hopes up! Perhaps historical weather will be something Asobo will implement if there’s enough request for it.

[Fraser Gale]

4 hours ago, Andrew Wilson said:

High Level Index - it's where they were permitted to add a small amount of extra fuel into each fuel tank to increase the range. 

I believe it was originally "High Level Increment" because it was only a tiny addition above the standard fuel level 

[Andrew Wilson]

2 hours ago, Fraser Gale said:

I believe it was originally "High Level Increment"

You're right, it is High Level Increment, my mistake.

[Trevor Hannant]

On 4/22/2022 at 6:20 PM, Andrew Wilson said:

Looking good!   In terms of the liveries, how are you planning to put these out?  There were 4 IIRC - will the airframes have a single livery each from that 4 with you relying on the community to cover the others for each?

[Andrew Wilson]

Hi Trevor, 

I think we'll be able to offer the majority of liveries that each airframe was painted in during their time in service, through the FSL Control Center. So, for example, you'll be able to download/install any of the seven British Airways airframes, individually configured with their correct weight and balance, in any of the British Airways paint schemes. We've even painted some hybrid liveries that were flown for short periods of time on specific airframes.

[Will Fibich]

Just now, Andrew Wilson said:

individually configured with their correct weight and balance,

Is this something that will be done with the Air France airframes? 

[Andrew Wilson]

7 minutes ago, Will Fibich said:

Is this something that will be done with the Air France airframes? 

Yes, all of them.