Leaderboard

Well looking at their product line whatever they decide to produce as their entry level to X-Plane it will be only good to have another quality plane maker into The X-Plane marketplace

CYUL-EGCC on a British Airways Boeing B767-300...

Yes, we have realistic spring constants and dampers. M

Hello, Pilots!, This is a quick note to say that as of today we have surpassed 10,000 registered members here at X-Pilot, and we sincerely appreciate everyone's participation in this community to make it as fun and welcoming as it is! We have watched our viewership and registration counts sharply increase over the last several months and we think this is a sign of great times ahead for X-Plane and all those in the community. Thanks to all of you who keep this place going. We certainly appreciate it!

As I always say on youtube...Your popularity is measured by the number of arguments in the comments. Looks the the FS2XP project is gaining popularity

Gurl, this is about the 787 not XPP, take your complaints somewhere else

So can we pay to be rated 5 stars like Skytrax

Another review site would be a welcome addition to the community.

and just like that i can't help anymore :/

The EADT project is a freeware effort by a small group of hobbyists, and one of the most respected names in X-Plane for the amount of personal time donated for everyone's benefit. It's second to none for the price you pay. This isn't Mortal Kombat. There is no "battle of developers" with the last one standing. There is room for both a higher-end payware model by PMDG and EADTs freeware model.

Hey Mike, I'll jump in on this one. We have all discussed internally "theories" regarding documentation for the flight sim market. One approach is to basically copy the AOM. For us, this implies that if it's in the AOM, it must be in the sim and despite marketing claims of many companies, very rarely will everything in the AOM be in the simulation, probably barely half in most cases. Most developers are willing to take the risk that customers won't go in so deep as to discover where they come up short and would rather have the marketing value of saying, "our stuff is so real you can use the real AOM". Going this route means either copying a whole lot of info or licensing the information, which is usually quite overwhelming in its breadth. We have good perspective with Jan's consultation because I believe even he will tell you he doesn't read all of the AOM that close and indeed MANY times, we had to read it together to find out how to simulate something exactly. So we asked ourselves, "what satisfies best all levels of simmers" and here is where we are now. We will be writing our own documentation that is a slimmed down paraphrasing of the AOM but not necessarily light. It will follow the AOM roughly but it will also contain product specific stuff of course for installation mumbo jumbo and the like. We'll have a quick start so users interested in instant gratification can get some satisfaction. We will back off somewhat on explaining in depth how systems work and focus more on how to work the systems from the pilot perspective. We believe this will satisfy the majority of the simmers out there. We might include less information initially on backup and standby systems which most simmers won't get into. Now for the hard core junkies, we feel that being hardcore junkies, they either have the AOM or know where to go get it as they're not too hard to find. So the question we asked ourselves in this situation was "what if a hardcore guy gets the manual and puts on thick glasses and goes over it line by line". In that case, we said, "well our sim should try and handle it". So we use the AOM to develop the sim as best we are able with our resources but we will not ship the same volume of information as the real one. So what you will find shipping with the sim is more basic descriptions, typical operating procedures with paraphrasing of the AOM; however, becasue we simulated it according to the AOM, we have some overhead to grow and expand and I think over time, after release, we will certainly consider adding a supplement to the documentation based on feedback or include more specialized stuff, but even for us we have to ask, if it follows the AOM exactly, why not just include it? Our final response to that is that most simmers, ourselves included, don't want that volume of information to have to wade through to find info. This is a entertainment market and not a high risk liability market and therefore the documentation needs are different. We want documentation that caters to what customers will be doing most often BUT if one desires more info, then yea, grab the AOM somewhere and knock yourself out because if it's in the AOM and our sim doesn't work as described there, then that is fair game for questioning. We may tell you that we voluntarily chose not to simulate a feature, but we may have missed something also. We use the AOM to guide our programming so we are game to look at it all. All that said, it market demands dictate, we may eaily change our minds after some feedback and it's not like adding the AOM to the download package is a big deal, only a big licensing cost TomK