Should A2A create an Official Military Trainer line of aircraft with a different focus than our traditional airplanes?

[Scott - A2A]

OK let's try this again, as I don't think my wording of the original question was accurate.

Let me explain to you what we have done for the T-6a and the T-38a. I put both aircraft through a rigorous Accu-Sim flight test. However, instead of bringing it to our normal flight standard, which is higher than any other flight sim developer, the military asked for even more.

We had to match numbers using 1/4 degrees. I cannot stress enough to everyone here the professionalism and standard by which the United States military trains on. No simulator comes close to what they require in terms of physics, including the multi million dollar simulators. We took the challenge and worked harder on engine and flight physics than ever before. So what we have is an aircraft that is hyper focused on it's flying qualities because this is what the military needed. Also all of the new knowledge we gained from these flight tests have fueled these products.

We've discussed in the past the "bucket" theory, and that is every product is limited by how much this bucket can hold. Basically, the bucket is time and resources. So I would ask again, what if we released this line of Official Military Trainers, that would have the following:
- Top level PBR modeling
- The highest level of flight physics
- Brand new turbine and turbo prop physics
- Accu-Sim sound
- Military manual approved for the public

What won't fit in this bucket will be:
- In depth manual with history
- Maintenance Hangar
- Walk around

Scott.

[Oracle427]

Sounds good to me.

[Ron Attwood]

As long as they feel like proper A2A then yes. In fact I cant understand why you're asking.

[AviationAtWar]

Switched my vote to a yes in light of the new info. I do value the maintenance hangar very much, but I wouldn't let not having it keep me from buying an airplane. The walkaround and manual are further down my importance list.

[patful]

I'll still vote yes, but not sure I'd buy one. I'd be okay without the walkaround since the warbirds don't have one, but I do like the maintenance hangar. I fly the Connie the least due to the lack of a real hangar.

[Josquin]

That's a no brainer YES!

[Paughco]

Scott: As they say in my favorite movie of all time (Sam Peckinpah's "The Wild Bunch"): "Let's Go!"

[paddler]

A definite yes!

[Jacques]

To be clear, I do really enjoy the maintenance hangar and the walk around, and I hope they can still have a place in some of your projects in future. But my vote is still a “yes”- High fidelity in flight modelling presents its own “educational” opportunites! Bring them on!

[BrettT]

Definite yes assuming the systems are modeled as well.

With regards to the hangar....sounds like something the crew chief would be taking care of for a military aircraft.

Though I have always felt the A2A manuals were well written, I would think the actual manual would be a good substitute for the custom written one if the systems are well modeled

[Hobart Escin]

I dunno Scott. Let's see - the U.S. military is actually using the A2A sim in question to actively train pilots to fly the real aircraft? Errrrrrrr, how could this not be one of the all-time best sellers ever released by A2A?????? You'd freaking have to upgrade your servers to handle the demand IMHO. Look, I totally get the high standards you have set for both yourself and A2A in releasing Accusim products, but you must also consider the new technology and ultra-high fidelity that has obviously gone into a professional military grade simulation; this fact alone eclipses the need for more 'traditional' Accusim experiences.

I'm thinking you already have a gut feeling on which direction to go at this point, and my advice is to follow your gut instinct here. I've always tried following my gut, btw. Don't have much of a choice these days as it always leads the way and mostly arrives someplace before the rest of me.

[Ifikratis]

Yes! 1000%

[Hobart Escin]

With regards to the hangar....sounds like something the crew chief would be taking care of for a military aircraft.

This.

[srburger]

Yes, Absolutely, No question about it!! For a number of reasons...

1. I flew the Texan II, T-38, and T-45 that A2A developed for "Combat Pilot Series" many years ago, and loved them. Their flight models "felt" so right and the sounds were awesome! Based on your development update, you've now gone way beyond those early efforts. That alone would be enough, but...

2. Your description of the work you put into the flight models and engine physics to satisfy the military specs has me salivating, plus...

3. With every A2A release, you advance the state of the art. The AccuSim B-17, P-47, B377, Cub, Spitfire, P-40, P-51, C172, Cherokee, Comanche, C182, T-6... each one of them has brought something special with it. I can't wait to see what you did with the T-6a and the T-38! Finally...

4. It would be a dream come true to finally have a T-38 simulation done right!

Speaking of flight models, sounds, etc. done right... Having purchased the T-6G during your recent sale, I can't put it down! I've never had so much fun in a flight sim. Thanks for that!

Ken

[Dogsbody55]

This sounds more like it. I kept thinking as I answered the other survey that we really needed to know more, so thank you for re-doing the question. This sounds like a great new line of A2A products, so I hope they get released. Military pilots might do a walk around or some other type of inspection before they get into a plane, but for them, the maintenance hangar is a mystery not to be concerned with I guess.

As long as you don't drop the maintenance hangar an walk around for any future GA planes, then I'm very happy with this. It will be great to get an A2A turbo prop and jet at last too. A nice broadening of the range!!


Cheers,
Mike