Luca Toscani Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 What are the latest news from fslabs for fs2020? Link to comment
Daniel Jaffe Posted March 12 Share Posted March 12 After the Concorde is released for P3D, FSL has indicated they will have more news on MSFS products. Look at the Concorde preview thread for messages from Andy Wilson. He discusses it there. Link to comment
Hendrik Schall Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 I'm kinda losing interest and hope....I assume that if someday Fslabs jumps into MSFS, the other A320 there is that grown up that the majority don't bothers about Fslabs anymore. It's kinda sad that after three years there aren't even rumors about a release of the A320 in the near future. Focusing on the concord for P3D until now seems from an outside perspective a very unlucky business decision beeing a niche twice! First it's a concord which for some people (for example amaing for the highest realism flying real world routes with up to date aircraft and procudures) isn't very interesting and second it's for P3D, a platform shrinking more from day to day. Even the plans to bring it after that to MSFS aren't making it better because it all seems to slow down the cash cow A320. I would spend a huge price for an A320neo for MSFS from Fslabs with a new outside and internal model paired with the well known system and sound precision. A good payware A320neo is still missing in MSFS (disregarding the fly by wire mod with its default VC having very odd geometries especially around the glareshield). But honestly I expect a release perhabs in 2025 for P3D flown after that only by a dozen simmers which stayed on P3D until that time. 1 Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Hendrik, it may surprise you how many people remain happy with P3D. Each new release has brought significant improvements and for me it remains the best IFR simulator. Note IFR. I happily accept that the scenery in MSFS is great but as you get higher the differences between it and P3D become less obvious. And of course it has a huge "elephant in the room" in live weather. One set of weather for wherever you're flying in the world. So if I choose to fly out of LAX for a daytime flight the sim is using nighttime weather. That's not something I'm prepared to accept especially when Asobo are adamant the weather engine is off limits to 3rd party developers as no SDK info or Weather API will be released for the forseeable future. Around a dozen Concorde users? How on earth did you arrive at that conclusion? 1 Link to comment
Hendrik Schall Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Yes, dozens was perhabs a little bit exaggerated. But I also tried to estimate a realistic date (according to the published updates and infos) of arrival of an A320neo in perhabs 1-2 years or later, assuming the condord comes first, and assumed that until this date even more people have switched from P3D to MSFS. I'm happy for everybody who is still enjoying P3D, I also look back with sadness to the beautiful A321 with sharklets or the 747 from PMDG. Link to comment
Alex Pugh Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 5 minutes ago, Hendrik Schall said: I also look back with sadness to the beautiful A321 with sharklets or the 747 from PMDG. Given how long it's going to take for either of those planes to come to MSFS, why not reinstall V5 (assuming you're a user)? I use MSFS, P3D, and XP12 alongside each other because each has different pros/cons and add-ons. It'll definitely be interesting to see what FSL thinks of their investment into P3D V5 after releasing the Concorde/NEO/A330 for it. It's a dead-end platform with very little support from other devs, especially scenery. Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 27 minutes ago, Hendrik Schall said: Yes, dozens was perhabs a little bit exaggerated. But I also tried to estimate a realistic date (according to the published updates and infos) of arrival of an A320neo in perhabs 1-2 years or later, assuming the condord comes first, and assumed that until this date even more people have switched from P3D to MSFS. I'm happy for everybody who is still enjoying P3D, I also look back with sadness to the beautiful A321 with sharklets or the 747 from PMDG. Concorde will come first. Another delay is inevitable as the Q1 period is ending in 2 weeks and it hasn't yet gone to beta. I can't comment on Airbus plans as I don't own the aircraft. Don't you fly P3Dv5 any more? All that money on aircraft and scenery? What a shame. 17 minutes ago, Alex Pugh said: Given how long it's going to take for either of those planes to come to MSFS, why not reinstall V5 (assuming you're a user)? I use MSFS, P3D, and XP12 alongside each other because each has different pros/cons and add-ons. It'll definitely be interesting to see what FSL thinks of their investment into P3D V5 after releasing the Concorde/NEO/A330 for it. It's a dead-end platform with very little support from other devs, especially scenery. Alex, a very big pro for P3D is historical weather and 3rd party camera utilities like ChasePlane. I don't mean weather from 10 years ago of course. Weather from this morning so those who work can enjoy correct weather when they return home from work for a morning departure from wherever in the world. That's something that can never be enjoyed in MSFS. Given the huge volume of scenery available for P3D it will be a long time before I can't buy an airport for P3D. It's easy enough to install an airport for v4 or v5 and point v6 to it. Why don't the advocates of MSFS even mention the problem of one set of weather? For accurate flight planning it's essential especially for Concorde in hot climates but affects all aircraft once your aircraft clock isn't set to Zulu time. Link to comment
Daniel Jaffe Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Ray, Most people are not flying a Concorde and most are not that fussed about the historical weather planning. Yes, MSFS should have at least a 24-48 historical weather options to make it more realistic and to aid the use of something like the Concorde, but if you look around, and I know you have, it’s just not getting that much traction. The good news is, I think Asobo could implement that option on its own even it doesn’t want to open the weather API. 2 Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Daniel, I can accept Concorde has a niche market. What I cannot understand is that people who willingly pay a lot of money for a state-of-the-art Airbus aren't concerned about the weather being inacurate if you start any flight more than 2-3 time zones from your home. Weather is the most important factor once you're airborne. Not how nice the scenery or clouds look. Those two are the big difference between MSFS and P3D. The former has no other obvious advantages over the latter. Asobo aren't interested in developing the weather. My guess is they have a exclusive contract with the supplier. Until that changes don't expect any changes in the weather apart from aesthetics. I've just completed two Concorde flights this morning in P3Dv3.4. I have to run a 4K monitor at 1920*1080 to avoid running out of VAS. I landed back at Manchester with 430Mb remaining. Those running their favourite aircraft in a 64-bit sim should count their blessings. I'm having to make huge compromises for my aircraft. Link to comment
Alex Pugh Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 36 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said: What I cannot understand Some people have different preferences and needs. 37 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said: Asobo aren't interested in developing the weather. Not true. 2 Link to comment
Daniel Jaffe Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 I think a lot of people are flying live time in MSFS . So it doesn’t really matter what time zone you’re in. Or if they change the time, they are using SimBrief and assuming current weather notwithstanding what ever time they set on the clock Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 47 minutes ago, Alex Pugh said: Some people have different preferences and needs. Speaking personally aircraft drive the choice of simulator for me. If a sim - however good it appears- doesn’t have the aircraft I want to fly I’ll not buy it. Hence why I never considered XP. P3D has all the ones I want to fly so it’s not a difficult decision to stay with it. I suppose if people are attracted by glitz whilst choosing to ignore the sim is in a perpetual beta state that’s up to them. I’ve not forgotten Microsoft abandoned flight sim back in 2009. There’s always the chance they’ll do it again. I’m always grateful to LM for resurrecting ESP and delivering a significantly better sim in the five iterations of P3D. 2 Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 8 minutes ago, Daniel Jaffe said: I think a lot of people are flying live time in MSFS . So it doesn’t really matter what time zone you’re in. Or if they change the time, they are using SimBrief and assuming current weather notwithstanding what ever time they set on the clock What that suggests to me is they’re not bothered about the weather. Many of us are especially when flying on the other side of the world to where we live. 1 Link to comment
Miguel de gonzalo Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 8 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said: Concorde will come first. Another delay is inevitable as the Q1 period is ending in 2 weeks and it hasn't yet gone to beta. I can't comment on Airbus plans as I don't own the aircraft. Don't you fly P3Dv5 any more? All that money on aircraft and scenery? What a shame. Alex, a very big pro for P3D is historical weather and 3rd party camera utilities like ChasePlane. I don't mean weather from 10 years ago of course. Weather from this morning so those who work can enjoy correct weather when they return home from work for a morning departure from wherever in the world. That's something that can never be enjoyed in MSFS. Given the huge volume of scenery available for P3D it will be a long time before I can't buy an airport for P3D. It's easy enough to install an airport for v4 or v5 and point v6 to it. Why don't the advocates of MSFS even mention the problem of one set of weather? For accurate flight planning it's essential especially for Concorde in hot climates but affects all aircraft once your aircraft clock isn't set to Zulu time. you just forgot about wx engines in msfs like xenviro.... it has historical wx , and a very very good accurate wx... Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 8 minutes ago, Miguel de gonzalo said: you just forgot about wx engines in msfs like xenviro.... it has historical wx , and a very very good accurate wx... Point me to a source where it’s linked to MSFS please. Link to comment
Miguel de gonzalo Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 6 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said: Point me to a source where it’s linked to MSFS please. yepp of course , im not sure if i can post here this kind of links , so if it is not please delete and forgive here is ther wx engine im talking , ive used in xplane previosly and its for me the best as active sky http://www.xenviro.net/2020/ cheers 1 Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 @Miguel de gonzalo, it’s of no interest to me but others may find it useful. As a long time user of Active Sky I’ve always been pleased with it in FSX and then P3D. 1 2 Link to comment
David Porrett Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 I'm with Ray here. I have most sims on my system, and while the graphics are fabulous in MSFS there is just something that stops me "loving" it. Whether it is the aforementioned issues, the "Active Pause" (I don't really understand what the use of it is), the fact that fixes are based on voting by users rather than the priority of the sim or whatever, I just haven't been able to "love it". Aircraft fidelity to me is the priority, and I am happy to accept lesser quality pretty visuals and the glitz and glamour if my aircraft and it's sub-systems work as accurately as possible. Link to comment
Miguel de gonzalo Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 hour ago, David Porrett said: I'm with Ray here. I have most sims on my system, and while the graphics are fabulous in MSFS there is just something that stops me "loving" it. Whether it is the aforementioned issues, the "Active Pause" (I don't really understand what the use of it is), the fact that fixes are based on voting by users rather than the priority of the sim or whatever, I just haven't been able to "love it". Aircraft fidelity to me is the priority, and I am happy to accept lesser quality pretty visuals and the glitz and glamour if my aircraft and it's sub-systems work as accurately as possible. Well , i do not want to create a new debate here , but i can warranty you that if we are talking about high fidelity , we have to think that 1: aerodynamics are way better than p3d.... 2: scenery , we can finally make vfr flight without spend thousands of dollars..... and no talking about how much space you save in terms of GB LOL... 3 : Robert randazzo said it multiple times.... : the fidelity on the 737 in msfs right now is far better than the one we have in p3d.... , (he also knows about the wx depic and wxv radar) but that is the only advantge from the p3d version... and if robert say so i guess we all can trust msfs its a high fidelity sim.... way better than most of the people think. Remember FSlabs created an aircfat that so many things works outside the sim because with the p3d tools and sdk its impossible also.... so what did fenix do ? the same , create a great aircraft running it outside the sim = you can "dodge" that bad sdk... ta least 95 % of the times :) Have a good evening 1 Link to comment
Craig Baillie Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 At some point there will be a FSL product on MSFS. Terms like losing hope, faith, respect etc. are all very melodramatic. It’s a game; it’s not all that important in the grand scheme of things . 4 1 Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 hour ago, Craig Baillie said: It’s a game; it’s not all that important in the grand scheme of things When you’re retired it provides lots of interest plus pushing you mentally. It’s very important to some. I don’t consider P3D a game. It’s a simulator that keeps me occupied during the long winter days and far preferable to watching daytime TV which just turns the brain to mush! 4 Link to comment
Graham Collins Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 I don't fly outside Europe and so live weather is fine for me. I'm just happy the plane follows the flight-plan and that I make a reasonable landing. I do enjoy seeing the MSFS interpretation of where I've actially been. MSFS is more immersive for this reason. I realise it is a game and full of compromises but when I find time for a flight it must be enjoyable and just work. P3D is no longer on my Flght Sim PC. I fly the Fenix A320 in MSFS exclusively now but come back here to see if anything has moved forward. I too am bemused at FS Labs' persistence with a study level Concorde - they've started and so I guess they must now see it through, regardless of how many punters will actually buy it - very niche in my opinion. It took me years to learn how to get a 320 from cold and dark to airborne and onto shutdown at a destination without issues - I dread to think how complex a study level Concorde would be. Purists must not use an EFB but paper charts and a highlighter pen ! Link to comment
Andrew Wilson Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 I'm surprised how many people think the entire FSLabs team is working on Concorde. The Concorde development team is small. The Airbus development team is several (read more than five) magnitudes larger. They have not been sat on their hands... 12 Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 28 minutes ago, Graham Collins said: I too am bemused at FS Labs' persistence with a study level Concorde - they've started and so I guess they must now see it through, regardless of how many punters will actually buy it - very niche in my opinion. It took me years to learn how to get a 320 from cold and dark to airborne and onto shutdown at a destination without issues - I dread to think how complex a study level Concorde would be. Purists must not use an EFB but paper charts and a highlighter pen ! It was their flagship product. Airbuses arrived later. They clearly made enough money from Concorde sales to expand. Whilst sales numbers won’t be known I’d be surprised if such an iconic aircraft wasn’t well received. Concorde is different to setup but probably less complex than the flying computer the Airbus is. A simple but effective INS navigation system and no VNAV to worry about. Full power for most of the flight. The most complex part is fuel management but you have a Virtual FE to do that until you feel confident enough. I’ve been handling fuel for around 4 years now and I’m probably a lot older than you. I use Aivlasoft’s EFB as an aid at airports. Excellent combination with the world’s most iconic aircraft. Link to comment
Pablo Prada Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 hour ago, Andrew Wilson said: I'm surprised how many people think the entire FSLabs team is working on Concorde. The Concorde development team is small. The Airbus development team is several (read more than five) magnitudes larger. They have not been sat on their hands... In that case would be nice to see some previews after almost one year. I’m sure that they are working hard, but as user I would appreciate some activity from the development team. 2 Link to comment
Søren Dissing Posted March 20 Share Posted March 20 1 hour ago, Andrew Wilson said: The Concorde development team is small. The Airbus development team is several (read more than five) magnitudes larger. They have not been sat on their hands... Hmmmm - let's see that MSFS A350 At least, I can still dream ... 3 Link to comment
davide montana Posted Monday at 06:49 PM Share Posted Monday at 06:49 PM Will be nice to have some update! Link to comment
Alex Pugh Posted Monday at 07:04 PM Share Posted Monday at 07:04 PM 6 hours ago, Andrew Wilson said: I'm surprised how many people think the entire FSLabs team is working on Concorde. The confusion probably stems from the fact that Airbus-focused users are waiting for the Concorde to release first before hearing news about that line, so from a layman's/outsider's POV, it looks like FSL is focused on one line at a time. 2 3 Link to comment
Danny Moore Posted Monday at 08:23 PM Share Posted Monday at 08:23 PM 1 hour ago, Alex Pugh said: The confusion probably stems from the fact that Airbus-focused users are waiting for the Concorde to release first before hearing news about that line, so from a layman's/outsider's POV, it looks like FSL is focused on one line at a time. That’s me. Can’t wait for Concorde, which I’m not buying, to release so we can get on with Airbus news. I sure miss the Sharklet Hype days. 3 Link to comment
David Porrett Posted Tuesday at 03:33 AM Share Posted Tuesday at 03:33 AM Can't wait for the Concorde because I can't wait for it. I just hope that we don't see more of the 320 family - there are enough of them already. Let's see something long haul. Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted Tuesday at 08:35 AM Share Posted Tuesday at 08:35 AM 19 hours ago, Andrew Wilson said: I'm surprised how many people think the entire FSLabs team is working on Concorde. The Concorde development team is small. The Airbus development team is several (read more than five) magnitudes larger. They have not been sat on their hands... Andrew, I’ve known you for many years but have no idea how many people work for FSL. How about a “About Us” link on your website naming the full team and what their responsibilities and areas of expertise are? I’ve always thought Concorde work was done by you and Lefteris. Maybe that’s incorrect. 2 Link to comment
Fraser Gale Posted Tuesday at 05:46 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 05:46 PM I think with the kind of online world there is now I wouldn’t be surprised if people don’t particularly want their names and areas of expertise on a website. Anonymity can sometimes be infinitely more enjoyable. Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted Tuesday at 05:57 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 05:57 PM 8 minutes ago, Fraser Gale said: I think with the kind of online world there is now I wouldn’t be surprised if people don’t particularly want their names and areas of expertise on a website. Anonymity can sometimes be infinitely more enjoyable. Doesn’t seem to have harmed Lefteris, Andrew, Pete and John Dowson plus many others who give their full names on their respective websites. And I’ve been using my own name in forums for over 20 years without incident. 1 Link to comment
Fraser Gale Posted Tuesday at 06:27 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 06:27 PM 29 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said: Doesn’t seem to have harmed Lefteris, Andrew, Pete and John Dowson plus many others who give their full names on their respective websites. And I’ve been using my own name in forums for over 20 years without incident. Their choice, others may not agree. Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted Tuesday at 06:38 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 06:38 PM 10 minutes ago, Fraser Gale said: Their choice, others may not agree. As customers we are required to provide our names on this forum. Why should there be a different rule for employees? Link to comment
Andrew Wilson Posted Tuesday at 06:48 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 06:48 PM I've just checked, we are all registered with our full names on the forum. 1 1 3 Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted Tuesday at 07:02 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 07:02 PM 13 minutes ago, Andrew Wilson said: I've just checked, we are all registered with our full names on the forum. Good. That’s that answered. What about my earlier request about who works on what? Link to comment
Fraser Gale Posted Tuesday at 10:56 PM Share Posted Tuesday at 10:56 PM 4 hours ago, Ray Proudfoot said: As customers we are required to provide our names on this forum. Why should there be a different rule for employees? I was not aware you were discussing the forum as your original demand was an “About Us” link on the website with details of company positions, this is different to using a forum, again by choice - I don’t think any customer is forced to use the forum. Anyway, not worth debating, makes no difference to the simulation of a Concorde. 5 Link to comment
Ray Proudfoot Posted Wednesday at 08:58 AM Share Posted Wednesday at 08:58 AM I made a reasonable suggestion to Andrew. He decided not to respond to it. There’s nothing more to say. Link to comment
Lefteris Kalamaras Posted Wednesday at 09:55 AM Share Posted Wednesday at 09:55 AM 56 minutes ago, Ray Proudfoot said: I made a reasonable suggestion to Andrew. He decided not to respond to it. There’s nothing more to say. Good. Let's stick to that, then. I am closing this thread. 3 6 Link to comment
Recommended Posts