Found this when starting the FSLabs Control Center...

[Trevor Hannant]

31 minutes ago, Andrew Wilson said:

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.

Thanks Andrew.  The highlighted part makes it sound like you can choose which airframes you have installed?   Or am I reading that wrongly?

[Andrew Wilson]

2 hours ago, Trevor Hannant said:

Thanks Andrew.  The highlighted part makes it sound like you can choose which airframes you have installed?   Or am I reading that wrongly?

Yes, you can now through our Control Center:

 

[Trevor Hannant]

Of course...  *facepalm*

[Ray Proudfoot]

@Andrew Wilson, you don’t list your hardware in your sig so I was wondering if you still have the 1080Ti and whether it’s delivering good performance in 4K for the new Concorde. What CPU are you using these days?

[Andrew Wilson]

Hi Ray - I'm still on the same system, i7700k with a 1080Ti and 32Gb ram.

[Ray Proudfoot]

9 minutes ago, Andrew Wilson said:

Hi Ray - I'm still on the same system, i7700k with a 1080Ti and 32Gb ram.

Thanks. Running at 4K or lower?

[Ray Proudfoot]

@Andrew Wilson, resolution please. 4K makes a big difference to HD.

[Craig Baillie]

4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@Andrew Wilson, resolution please. 4K makes a big difference to HD.

Are you running 4K? Performance killer for me and I have a very well spec’d machine.

[Ray Proudfoot]

9 minutes ago, Craig Baillie said:

Are you running 4K? Performance killer for me and I have a very well spec’d machine.

Yes, hence the question. But I don’t own any Airbus aircraft and also run my monitor at 30Hz which imposes less strain on the graphics side.

[Craig Baillie]

I find 2K is my sweet spot. Otherwise I’m plagued with the stutters.

This is with the A32X….I consider that the most demanding of my setup.

[Ray Proudfoot]

3 minutes ago, Craig Baillie said:

I find 2K is my sweet spot. Otherwise I’m plagued with the stutters.

This is with the A32X….I consider that the most demanding of my setup.

2K? Do you mean 1920*1080?

The PMDG 737 is less demanding and fine in 4K. What refresh rate do you use?

Still waiting for a reply from Andrew.

[Duncan MacKellar]

13 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

2K? Do you mean 1920*1080?

The PMDG 737 is less demanding and fine in 4K. What refresh rate do you use?

Still waiting for a reply from Andrew.

Ray, 

Its a Bank Holiday weekend, I wouldn't expect a reply from anyone until Tuesday or Wednesday. 

Duncan 

[Craig Baillie]

14 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

2K? Do you mean 1920*1080?

The PMDG 737 is less demanding and fine in 4K. What refresh rate do you use?

I have a widescreen set at 3440 x 1440 and I limit myself to 2K textures in P3D (2048).

My recent upgrade to a 3080ti enabled me to move up a level in the sim textures. Though that was more a VRAM problem.

[Ray Proudfoot]

33 minutes ago, Duncan MacKellar said:

Ray, 

Its a Bank Holiday weekend, I wouldn't expect a reply from anyone until Tuesday or Wednesday. 

Duncan 

I asked the question 3 days ago. Not expecting an answer today. Just reminding Andrew he didn’t answer.

[Koen Meier]

Full HD is 1080p height with 1920p width. HD being 720p strangely.

2K is 1440p height but not exclusive to the width with 2560p. so 2K is also used with QHD after to indicate something about the size. QHD in this case means 4 screens of 720p can fit in the space.

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/what-is-hd,5745.html

[Ray Proudfoot]

32 minutes ago, Craig Baillie said:

I have a widescreen set at 3440 x 1440 and I limit myself to 2K textures in P3D (2048).

My recent upgrade to a 3080ti enabled me to move up a level in the sim textures. Though that was more a VRAM problem.

That’s 4.96 million pixels compared to 8.3m for UHD. With a 3080Ti you really should be running UHD. It’s a waste otherwise.

[Andrew Wilson]

Hi Ray - I kept meaning to check my resolution in P3D for you. I’ll have a look when I’m back on the desktop on Tuesday.

[Craig Baillie]

6 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

It’s a waste otherwise.

I disagree. It has brought performance enhancements and stability which enable me to run P3D the best I ever have. 

As I don’t have a 4K capable monitor I can’t speak for that except to say I see no need for a higher resolution in either P3D or MSFS.

[Fraser Gale]

9 minutes ago, Craig Baillie said:

I disagree. It has brought performance enhancements and stability which enable me to run P3D the best I ever have. 

As I don’t have a 4K capable monitor I can’t speak for that except to say I see no need for a higher resolution in either P3D or MSFS.

Agreed, a bit of “head room” can go a long way.  

[Ray Proudfoot]

9 minutes ago, Craig Baillie said:

I disagree. It has brought performance enhancements and stability which enable me to run P3D the best I ever have. 

As I don’t have a 4K capable monitor I can’t speak for that except to say I see no need for a higher resolution in either P3D or MSFS.

Craig, I don’t know how you can disagree with something you haven’t tried.

The extra resolution of UHD with virtual cockpits makes them a pleasur to use. 2160 pixels versus 1440 is a 50% improvement. The 3080Ti is more than capable of delivering high fps in UHD.

But each to their own.

[Craig Baillie]

16 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Craig, I don’t know how you can disagree with something you haven’t tried.

I did try.
 

Trying informed my decision to buy the ultra-widescreen monitor over a 4K monitor .

[Ray Proudfoot]

37 minutes ago, Craig Baillie said:

I did try.

Trying informed my decision to buy the ultra-widescreen monitor over a 4K monitor .

That puts a different perspective on things. Ultra widescreen gives you a completely different view.

PS. You need to change your sig.

[Craig Baillie]

1 hour ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

 

PS. You need to change your sig.

Ah yes; that’ll be ancient now I guess.

One doesn’t see it on the mobile version of the forums.

Thanks for the reminder.

[Ray Proudfoot]

@Steve Prowse, I’ve just read your posts on the JustFlight forum. Will you be having a change of heart about P3D? All that glitters isn’t gold. 

[Fraser Gale]

@Ray Proudfoot would it not be more appropriate to discuss things that happen on another forum on that other forum, rather than bring them here? 

[Ray Proudfoot]

4 minutes ago, Fraser Gale said:

@Ray Proudfoot would it not be more appropriate to discuss things that happen on another forum on that other forum, rather than bring them here? 

I posted here because Steve specifically wanted a Concorde for MSFS. His experience wasn’t what he hoped for. So perhaps he will reconsider. So, no, this is the right place for any discussion he wants.

[Fraser Gale]

3 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I posted here because Steve specifically wanted a Concorde for MSFS. His experience wasn’t what he hoped for. So perhaps he will reconsider. So, no, this is the right place for any discussion he wants.

Whatever you say and in that case, just to correct some information you gave out on said other forum: the normal takeoff CG positions for a typical route were 53.5% or 54%, not 53% or 53.5% as you stated.  A 53% departure would have only been used for light weight/low fuel load.  
I didn’t want to contradict you in front of your fans over there but a refresh of the information here seems in order. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

@Fraser GaleI provided loads of info for Concorde flights which was much appreciated including from the developer and leading programmer.

For you to nitpick here over something so minor seems very ungracious. They’re not “my fans” as you put it. They were appreciative of the help I provided. Something you could easily have done yourself.

[Fraser Gale]

@Ray Proudfoot once again you miss the fact I went out of my way to avoid criticism of you in public and turn it into a negative.  
 

The takeoff CG was critical and not as you state “minor”, and was a factor in the only catastrophic event in the life of the aircraft.  I am not providing help to people who fly other versions of Concorde in the sim, as I have no way of knowing what is modelled accurately and what isn’t, so as a professional educator it would be inappropriate to advise.  
 

I am aware you enjoy helping and have provided many people with Concorde information over the years and I am not criticising that, I just have a different outlook on passing on such information - checking the sources etc.  I do believe I in turn have provided yourself with a lot of information over the years - it’s how the community works really. 

As an aside, I find it difficult to keep up with the other forums because there are so many categories, so I only dip in and out as and when. 

Anyway, as I predicted this has gone way off topic again so that’s that. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

@Fraser Gale, you have helped me here and I appreciate that. But I feel you seem to comment on my posts far more than anyone else's. It's like you're watching everything I post - here and eslewhere.

The DCD Concorde model is nowhere near an accurate one. The CG setting would make no difference whatsoever. I've seen some YT videos where it's fully forward but the aircraft rotates and climbs without issue. The developer has stated on many occasions the aircraft is not a study-level version and never will be.

So the fact I got the take-off CG slightly wrong is immaterial to its performance.

[Fraser Gale]

5 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@Fraser Gale, you have helped me here and I appreciate that. But I feel you seem to comment on my posts far more than anyone else's. It's like you're watching everything I post - here and eslewhere.

I have better things to do with my time - I didn’t comment on this over on the other forum did I?  Also, you are one of the few who post information about Concorde, which I always take an interest in - and check. 
 

8 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

@Fraser GaleSo the fact I got the take-off CG slightly wrong is immaterial to its performance.

I am sure you are correct with this statement, however you are spreading inaccurate information about Concorde to people who are interested in her. 

As I say, I have better things to do and I’m in the middle of a flight so there’s no point continuing this discussion.  
 

Happy takeoffs and landings. 

 

[Ramón Cutanda]

Quote

We also expect to release the Concorde on Prepar3D first and again, we're working to release it to the MSFS platform. We will be excited to share more previews of this title as it enters beta testing in the next six to eight weeks!

Source: https://forums.flightsimlabs.com/index.php?/topic/31971-may-12-2022-a-news-update/

 

[Michele Benedetti]

Let's gooooooooo can't wait for this beauty in P3D, in MSFS it will be just mindblowing 

[Thiago Braun]

Glad it is coming to MSFS! Probably the last study-level airliner that I have not purchased yet. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

I anticipate it will be years - yes, honestly - before it is available for MSFS. As things stand it’s not possible to enter lat/lon into that sim and the SDK must still be a long way from the P3D equivalent.

Imagine if FSL announced it would be available within 12 months. Sales of the P3D version would plummet.

For those of us who are happy with P3D I look forward to flying it for many years in a stable mature sim.

[Alex Pugh]

3 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

I anticipate it will be years - yes, honestly - before it is available for MSFS. As things stand it’s not possible to enter lat/lon into that sim 

I guess it depends on if the plane is coded in Java vs. C++/WASM, because NG3 has a fully simulated INS, so I don’t believe that’s a limiter for FSL.

[Ray Proudfoot]

7 minutes ago, Alex Pugh said:

I guess it depends on if the plane is coded in Java vs. C++/WASM, because NG3 has a fully simulated INS, so I don’t believe that’s a limiter for FSL.

That aside I still don’t see it arriving any time soon unless FSL decided to take a hit on their P3D sales knowing they may recoup their investment with the MSFS version. Pricing would be a factor of course - for both versions.

[Søren Dissing]

11 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

Imagine if FSL announced it would be available within 12 months. Sales of the P3D version would plummet.

I think they might plummet anyway - regardless of the timeframe for the MSFS version. I had contemplated reinstalling P2D when Concorde was ready, but today's announcement does away with that.

Being one of the individuals that originally indicated my support for a 64-bit version via e-mail one might argue that I'm breaking that promise, but so be it. Pretty sure that I'm not the only one, though...

[Seth Goodwin]

3 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said:

That aside I still don’t see it arriving any time soon unless FSL decided to take a hit on their P3D sales knowing they may recoup their investment with the MSFS version. Pricing would be a factor of course - for both versions.

I'm not telling them how to run their business, they've been pretty apt at that over the past decade. With that said if they want any significant P3D sales at this point, they'd arguably have to offer a significant a price discount/credit for the other simulator ala their 4 letter Boeing competitor's last P3D offering. P3D's days as a viable market for developers are numbered if not already done.

2 minutes ago, Søren Dissing said:

I think they might plummet anyway - regardless of the timeframe for the MSFS version. I had contemplated reinstalling P2D when Concorde was ready, but today's announcement does away with that.

Being one of the individuals that originally indicated my support for a 64-bit version via e-mail one might argue that I'm breaking that promise, but so be it. Pretty sure that I'm not the only one, though...

Yeah I'm in the same boat. I never migrated to P3D as their wasn't a compelling reason to upgrade for me versus FSX. Had MSFS not come out, I was prepared to migrate to P3D with Concorde at its release, but that wasn't going to happen anymore for me with MSFS. And like I said above to Ray, other than potentially waiting (something we've all already done for years...) there isn't a compelling reason for most people to buy it now. Hence why I think if they want any meaningful sales they'll probably have to basically credit the purchase towards MSFS, basically allowing them to book revenue now.

[Michele Benedetti]

I will gladly buy it for P3D as soon as it comes out and buy it again for MSFS. But only because it's my favourite aircraft. The A330, for example, I'll buy it for sure but on MSFS only. 

[Ray Proudfoot]

1 minute ago, Seth Goodwin said:

And like I said above to Ray, other than potentially waiting (something we've all already done for years...) there isn't a compelling reason for most people to buy it now.

There is for me. I’ve waited a long time for a 64-bit Concorde and I’m no spring chicken.

Given most of its flights were over open ocean what advantages does the MSFS version bring over the P3D one? Very few that I can see and remember third-party access to the weather engine is still prevented. So no AS with historical weather. Essential if you want accurate weather for departures not in your own time zone.

[Will Fibich]

Are they saying the beta testing will begin in 6-8 weeks, or that the beta period will be 6-8 weeks long from now? 

Edited May 12, 2022 by Will Fibich
spelling

[Michele Benedetti]

4 minutes ago, Will Fibich said:

Are they saying the beta testing will begin i. 6-8 weeks, or that the beta period will be 6-8 weeks long from now? 

I think the first one

[Norman Blackburn]

26 minutes ago, Will Fibich said:

Are they saying the beta testing will begin in 6-8 weeks, or that the beta period will be 6-8 weeks long from now? 

Its the former.  You may have seen a few of us flying over the past few months online during development.

[Steve Prowse]

Brilliant news Concorde for MSFS….the best news I’ve heard for a long time.  So like some said above it’s FSX for until Concorde for MSFS comes along.  So with that in mind I’ve got the 737, A320 in MSFS, and old faithful my Concorde in FSX, lovely jubbly…