The future of the other A2A machines that aren't yet avalible for Prepar3d

[Tomas Linnet]

FWIW I think a non-Accusimmed airplane is none. I'm very much into the details under the hood, and while I think A2A produces the most wonderful and greatly detailed models, I would not fly a non-Accusimmed anything. Here's hoping for a new start of the older planes!

I'm not interested in non Accu-Sim aircraft.

Indeed. Port them as is. No PBR. No enhancements. They can add more later if needed. Then do the Avro Lancaster.

Everything else is irrelevant.

Steve.

#YES

[Artur]

Connie is not accu sim so is not in my hangar.

[wblackret]

First off, I prefer ONLY A2A aircraft because of the detail and realism they bring to my favorite past time. Here’s how I have viewed things. Now with P3D v5 and the pending future release of MSFS, and the slow development or upgrading of new or old A2A aircraft, there must be something in the wind. This is purely speculation, A2A is already developing for MSFS and still trying to keep abreast of any advances with P3D. A stretch could include developing aircraft for Xplane as well. It’s the only way I can justify in my mind how things have slowed. Other developers keep pushing out product, in my opinion, to grab as much money as possible, sacrificing what A2A puts into all they release. When MSFS is finally released, where would I want to be as a developer? Right in the forefront.

None of this is meant as a slam to A2A or any other developer, just my humble opinion from my comfy recliner. With all this down time during the pandemic, it gives one time to think or speculate. In my case, that’s dangerous!

[WB_FlashOver]

FWIW I think a non-Accusimmed airplane is none. I'm very much into the details under the hood, and while I think A2A produces the most wonderful and greatly detailed models, I would not fly a non-Accusimmed anything. Here's hoping for a new start of the older planes!

Ditto. I wouldn't even download it at a cost of $0.00. Not worth the time. Accu-sim or nothing for me. And here's hoping you all find the time to update soon

[Medtner]

First off, I prefer ONLY A2A aircraft because of the detail and realism they bring to my favorite past time. Here’s how I have viewed things. Now with P3D v5 and the pending future release of MSFS, and the slow development or upgrading of new or old A2A aircraft, there must be something in the wind. This is purely speculation, A2A is already developing for MSFS and still trying to keep abreast of any advances with P3D. A stretch could include developing aircraft for Xplane as well. It’s the only way I can justify in my mind how things have slowed. Other developers keep pushing out product, in my opinion, to grab as much money as possible, sacrificing what A2A puts into all they release. When MSFS is finally released, where would I want to be as a developer? Right in the forefront.

None of this is meant as a slam to A2A or any other developer, just my humble opinion from my comfy recliner. With all this down time during the pandemic, it gives one time to think or speculate. In my case, that’s dangerous!

You might very well be on to something. I just hope the fact that A2A have been hiring lately indicates that they intend do expand rather than change direction.

I just thought about the topic in this post more thoroughly last night when having a 2-3 hour flight in the Bonanza in v5. I can forgo scenery perfection, I can forgo hyper detailed visuals in general (though I need relatively real weather, and preferably live), but I can't forgo the deep modelling of the systems and physics. I feel empty and depressed by just thinking about it. It's like loosing ones color vision.

The corollary of this is that Accusim puts the color back in flight sim.

[jcblom]

Funny that you say a non-accusimmed aircraft is no aircraft.
That's exactly what we have, no aircraft. No P-47, no B-17. So what's the point?
Yes, I would like to have them with all bells and whistles, but I'd rather have them without than not have them at all.
So if the full monty is for you, wait until it is released, somewhere in the distant future, but meanwhile, let me enjoy slightly simpler versions. I'm willing to pay for them, but not for a pipe dream that may or may not materialise.
I am now installing nice old FSX models in P3Dv5, and really enjoying them, but no P-47, no B-17, and I miss them. They were some of the best looking models in FSX, why not for P3D?
BTW, I installed the T-6 and the Bonanza in P3Dv5, but they work poorly I think. C172 works better. Are they too complicated? They do not give me the enjoyment I look for, so I am using them less and less...

Oh, and I would LOVE a T-33 with the A2A looks, even without accusim.

[wblackret]

Yep! Like Forrest Gump once said while using flight simulator, “Accusim is as Accusim does.” His momma was noted as saying, “Forrest, Accusim is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you’re gonna get!”

[Medtner]

Funny that you say a non-accusimmed aircraft is no aircraft.
That's exactly what we have, no aircraft. No P-47, no B-17. So what's the point?
Yes, I would like to have them with all bells and whistles, but I'd rather have them without than not have them at all.
So if the full monty is for you, wait until it is released, somewhere in the distant future, but meanwhile, let me enjoy slightly simpler versions. I'm willing to pay for them, but not for a pipe dream that may or may not materialise.
I am now installing nice old FSX models in P3Dv5, and really enjoying them, but no P-47, no B-17, and I miss them. They were some of the best looking models in FSX, why not for P3D?

Oh, and I would LOVE a T-33 with the A2A looks, even without accusim.

That's my point. Having them without Accusim is the same as not having them for me.
But I'm not going to deny you the enjoyment of great models if A2A choose to go that route. However if the "light" version prohibits a fully Accusimmed version down the road then I'm against it. If we can have both, then I'm very much on board.

[wblackret]

Medtner: “ However if the "light" version prohibits a fully Accusimmed version down the road then I'm against it. If we can have both, then I'm very much on board.“

I agree totally!

[bladerunner900]

They've done it before. The original P-40, P-51, Spitfire and B-17 started life as standard aircraft, like the default ones. An Accu_Sim package was released later for each of them individually.

Steve.

[Dogsbody55]

Scott, you should go into politics! So many words to say exactly nothing, beautiful!

Thanks for the compliment... I think

I had an idea: would it be an option to bring out simplified models of our old friends (17, 47, 377) , Aircraft Factory style, to tie us over, until the moment arrives you guys find the time to update the model to accusim standard?
I know, sacrilege to many, but I'd rather have a flying P-47 than no P-47, same for the B-17. Even without accusim, your models are better than most of the competition.
We're now waiting longer for an update, than it originally took you to make it in the first place I think...
Just a thought..

Lewis, Mike, do you hear this ^ ? We've had plenty of discussions about this, frankly me wanting to do what you are doing. I've been shot down by the entire crew. And in the end I begrudgingly agree. But if you want to make any headway, you need to start bugging Lewis

Scott.

Way to through Lewis under the bus

I'm very glad to hear that at least the P-47 is being discussed by the team. Speaking only for myself, I'm looking for the Thunderbolt to be updated in it's original form, with AccuSim, and I don't really care if it's too much trouble to update it to PBR, nice though that is. But it has to have the AccuSim model too. If a plane doesn't have AccuSim, I'm not interested. I've recently tried a couple of the free offerings, and it's very nice of these other companies to offer us all a freebie in these difficult times, but I'm sorry to say that they've been quickly deleted, as they just feel lifeless even with AccuFeel. Having had some flying time in real life, nothing other than an Accusim plane holds my interest. And the P-47 is still so much fun to fly with many interesting foibles. I have tried installing the plane without Accusim into P3D V4.3, but on my machine there are too many issues to make it viable so it's been regretfully deleted. This is why I'm nagging for the updated version, even though the A2A model is now more than a decade old. The flightsim world has become a confusing place lately, with so many new developments happening all at once, but this plane has stood the test of time.

I'm on V4.5 of P3D now and I only moved from FSX because I got so tired of it's instability and long load times. It's been an expensive exercise too, so I won't be making moves to another sim for a while either. But I'd happily pay for a P3D P-47 in a heartbeat.

So Lewis, consider yourself about to be nagged some more. Here's the deal. You nag the team for a P3D P-37, and I'll join the chorus nagging for a Lancaster. Sound fair??


Cheers,
Mike

[SeattleSleeper]

The non-Accu-sim B-17 works fine in P3DV4. No need for another non-Accu-sim version. The P-47 in P3DV4 is another story, full flaps cause you to drop straight down.

[jcblom]

But they do not work in P3Dv5...I tried

And yes a Lancaster too, of course!

[DrumsArt]

FWIW I think a non-Accusimmed airplane is none. I'm very much into the details under the hood, and while I think A2A produces the most wonderful and greatly detailed models, I would not fly a non-Accusimmed anything. Here's hoping for a new start of the older planes!

Agree... The same for me. Non-Accusimed? No way.
Richard.

[bladerunner900]

If you limit yourself to Accu-Sim then you will miss out on some real gems out there. For me, that would be the MJ C-47 for one. We all have our favourites and you can guess what mine is. Having it working flawlessly in v5 is a condition of whether or not I will 'upgrade'. There are others I would like to see, to be given the Accu-Sim treatment but being realistic, I know they will never get it.

Steve.