A2A Update

[modelr]

A2A is back up, and has a big update post. https://a2asimulations.com/a2a-development-update-may-2019/


Also, to celebrate, a 25% sale on everything! I just picked up the P3Dv4 versions of the P-51, both Military and Civilian, and the P-40.

 

[Timmy74]

That is s great news!

However, hat happens when P3Dv5 gets released.....will one have to repurchase all of their A2A products again?

 

[Daube]

That is s great news!

However, hat happens when P3Dv5 gets released.....will one have to repurchase all of their A2A products again?

Depends on how much differences/compatibilities there will be between v4 and v5. Nobody knows that at the moment.
And even for v4, you didn't have to rebuy all of the A2A planes, did you ? Some of them were upgraded for free... the GA ones I think. Only the older warbirds had to be re-bought.

 

[Timmy74]

Depends on how much differences/compatibilities there will be between v4 and v5. Nobody knows that at the moment.
And even for v4, you didn't have to rebuy all of the A2A planes, did you ? Some of them were upgraded for free... the GA ones I think. Only the older warbirds had to be re-bought.

That's great! I must have missed the free upgrade from v3 to v4 then- I only have their GA planes for FSX and P3Dv3!? I better pop over to A2A and find the free upgrades to V4.

Thank you.

 

[Obie311]

Interesting that USAF chose A2A instead of MilViz for the T-6A and T-38. I'm waiting for the Aerostar. That's a hot little twin.

 

[StormILM]

I had all my A2A models in FSX so no free upgrade which I understand there are differences in the product but in my opinion, we should have at least gotten an upgrade coupon (similar to what other devs have offered). I won't be repurchasing those models at full price and am unlikely to buy any more of their products in the future for fear of being stuck as I am now after moving over in this platform.

 

[Mach3DS]

Interesting that USAF chose A2A instead of MilViz for the T-6A and T-38. I'm waiting for the Aerostar. That's a hot little twin.

Milviz 100% has the contract for IFF T-38C through the AETC. The T-38 C is far more complex than the A model. It's far more complex than the F-15C to code. And Milviz has it. Milviz is working behind the scenes in some additional areas of opportunity that cannot be named at this time.

Pilot Training Next (PTN) is the T-6A and is a side program away from the normal UPT program. The T-38A contract is likely for PTN as a way to help them do better in the B course. From my contacts the PTN grads are not doing so hot in some key areas and a dissimilar jet trainer is good for procedural training over and above just T-6A experience.

 

[Daube]

I had all my A2A models in FSX so no free upgrade which I understand there are differences in the product but in my opinion, we should have at least gotten an upgrade coupon (similar to what other devs have offered). I won't be repurchasing those models at full price and am unlikely to buy any more of their products in the future for fear of being stuck as I am now after moving over in this platform.

You had the planes for FSX so you had to pay them again to get them for P3D.
However, those who got the planes for P3Dv2 or P3Dv3 didn't need to pay for them again for P3Dv4.
I agree a coupon system would have been nice. That being said, their "flying hours" system in their new store is exactly that. The planes you bought in the past gave you a small price reduction for buying new ones.

 

[Naruto-kun]

Interesting that USAF chose A2A instead of MilViz for the T-6A and T-38. I'm waiting for the Aerostar. That's a hot little twin.

Milviz 100% has the contract for IFF T-38C through the AETC. The T-38 C is far more complex than the A model. It's far more complex than the F-15C to code. And Milviz has it. Milviz is working behind the scenes in some additional areas of opportunity that cannot be named at this time.

Pilot Training Next (PTN) is the T-6A and is a side program away from the normal UPT program. The T-38A contract is likely for PTN as a way to help them do better in the B course. From my contacts the PTN grads are not doing so hot in some key areas and a dissimilar jet trainer is good for procedural training over and above just T-6A experience.

Milviz doesn’t offer a T-6A, and our T-38A doesn’t have the newer tech that our C has. Also it’s not just IFF that uses our C. At least 2 other UPT or SUPT (can’t recall which) squadrons use it, and it receives heavy use in the PITN (Pilot Instructor Training Next) program for training instructors to fly from the back seat.

 

[Mach3DS]

Thanks JB. Wasnt sure exactly, what I could share.

 

[StormILM]

You had the planes for FSX so you had to pay them again to get them for P3D.
However, those who got the planes for P3Dv2 or P3Dv3 didn't need to pay for them again for P3Dv4.
I agree a coupon system would have been nice. That being said, their "flying hours" system in their new store is exactly that. The planes you bought in the past gave you a small price reduction for buying new ones.

I took a look at the flying hours deal and yes, both of my most recent purchases were part of that program but between the Connie and the T-6, it only knocked off $6.50 out of over roughly $110 from my previous purchases. Not to sound ungrateful that but for me personally, I can't justify buying the models again at that price. I accept I had good use of them for a a couple of years and like a number of my old models that are outdated, I have written these off now. My spending priorities are on newer products which for me offer a higher tier of usability/capability.

 

[Mach3DS]

Depends on how much differences/compatibilities there will be between v4 and v5. Nobody knows that at the moment.
And even for v4, you didn't have to rebuy all of the A2A planes, did you ? Some of them were upgraded for free... the GA ones I think. Only the older warbirds had to be re-bought.

Right now v4 is backward compatible with models that use both PBR and non-PBR. V5 will likely be exclusive to PBR based only. My guess is that core functions of the sim will remain intact as far as how.stuff is coded to work as far as non graphical outputs are concerned. But my guess is that anything graphical will be obsolete if it's not native PBR. That is the future. And to be honest Ray tracing is the future. It wouldn't surprise me if it incorporated Ray tracing as native. This would be an easy demarcation line for LM between the "OLD" and the "New" sim. It's what I would do. Not.that that has any bearing on the winds of change. I wouldn't be surprised if it has significant SDK changes to incorporate new changes and drop outdated processes.

Regarding previous purchased aircraft. A2A flat out side lined me when I point blanked asked them if I'd have to repurchase a PBR version for v5. I'm not giving A2A anymore money for ZERO improvments to their products just for a different version number. I've learned my lesson from TacPack and the VRS Super Bug. I've purchased those 3x over and there's been no change from VRS aside from adding 3rd party content. VRS released a road map a long time ago that listed 3 phases of development. One of which was supposed to incorporate AI bandits. Nothing. It's been like 6 years. So I'm on a personal haitus from purchasing anymore non PBR non-V5 aircraft. It's just too frustrating to have to rebuy same product with no improvement simply because Of an .exe change in version. I had my A2A birds working perfectly in P3D and was told that they don't work in P3D by A2A. There you have it. When a fully modern, P-51 that incorporates all their latest tach comes around I might consider it. But honestly, since flying DCS, the A2A P-51D is nothing special. It's what almost all aircraft are like in DCS only they work as tools and not just as airshow displays. I'm waiting for Warbirdsim to start doing PBR mustangs in all their accurate glory. So much more history than the generic A2A bird. My biased .02 cents. I admit it.

 

[StormILM]

I agree Rick, you went into much more detail that I did but that covers pretty much my feelings as well.

I want to clarify, I'm not here trying to swipe at A2A, their business model is their decision and they have a loyal customer base. IMO, in the past they certainly helped move PC based simulations up more than a few notches as well as the competition. My belief has for some time now been that these types of simulators could become valuable training tools and the advances in coding continue make it even better. I think new students at various entry levels in aviation studies can and will benefit from some of the products A2A and other Devs have developed. My laying off buying more of their products/upgrading is simply based on value versus my needs and likely usage of the product That's all. I am now gravitating towards newer products that give me more of what I am looking for.

 

[FlyingsCool]

Egad... 9 planes later

My first A2A purchases since I think 2009 (my last purchases were pre-accusim). Given their expense, I'd been holding off for years, but I was finally just getting ready to purchase a couple, but kept fighting myself which 2 to get... Then literally as I was about to pull the trigger... I couldn't cause the site went down...

Then... Sale!!!

Serendipity...

Sale plus A2A points, I got more than 3 for free

Now... where am I going to find the time to fly them all?

Looking at years of enjoyment here

 

[pilto von pilto]

Right now v4 is backward compatible with models that use both PBR and non-PBR. V5 will likely be exclusive to PBR based only. My guess is that core functions of the sim will remain intact as far as how.stuff is coded to work as far as non graphical outputs are concerned. But my guess is that anything graphical will be obsolete if it's not native PBR. That is the future. And to be honest Ray tracing is the future. It wouldn't surprise me if it incorporated Ray tracing as native. This would be an easy demarcation line for LM between the "OLD" and the "New" sim. It's what I would do. Not.that that has any bearing on the winds of change. I wouldn't be surprised if it has significant SDK changes to incorporate new changes and drop outdated processes.

Regarding previous purchased aircraft. A2A flat out side lined me when I point blanked asked them if I'd have to repurchase a PBR version for v5. I'm not giving A2A anymore money for ZERO improvments to their products just for a different version number. I've learned my lesson from TacPack and the VRS Super Bug. I've purchased those 3x over and there's been no change from VRS aside from adding 3rd party content. VRS released a road map a long time ago that listed 3 phases of development. One of which was supposed to incorporate AI bandits. Nothing. It's been like 6 years. So I'm on a personal haitus from purchasing anymore non PBR non-V5 aircraft. It's just too frustrating to have to rebuy same product with no improvement simply because Of an .exe change in version. I had my A2A birds working perfectly in P3D and was told that they don't work in P3D by A2A. There you have it. When a fully modern, P-51 that incorporates all their latest tach comes around I might consider it. But honestly, since flying DCS, the A2A P-51D is nothing special. It's what almost all aircraft are like in DCS only they work as tools and not just as airshow displays. I'm waiting for Warbirdsim to start doing PBR mustangs in all their accurate glory. So much more history than the generic A2A bird. My biased .02 cents. I admit it.

Going to have to disagree with the raytracing part and have no opinions either way on the second paragraph other than DCS is a different simulator... how well does the DCS P51 handle in P3d? Does it handle worse or better than A2A's or in fact what are it's frame-rates like ? Oh wait... Apples and oranges - 'tis a little tough to compare 2 disparate things.

Raytracing is early on. Look at UE4 for example. It has only been mainstream in the engine for around 2-3 months ( v4.22 ? ) the majority of people out there arent going to be able to run it on anything less than a 10 series ( and a high 10 series at that ) with acceptable frame rates. I dont know how the training organisations use P3d or not but I would have thought their budgets might not exactly allow for computer upgrades every year or so. I only know of the places near me in Australia and last I popped in there they were installing a "new to them " gtx 960". With LM's focus being training and not consumer... I'd have thought they would try to keep it at the lowest common denominator spec. So whilst I think your ideas on PBR requirement will be on point, I dont think they will jump 2 generation shifts. Especially since raytracing is such a young technology with relatively high requirements.

 

[FlyingsCool]

Going to have to disagree with the raytracing part and have no opinions either way on the second paragraph other than DCS is a different simulator... how well does the DCS P51 handle in P3d? Does it handle worse or better than A2A's or in fact what are it's frame-rates like ? Oh wait... Apples and oranges - 'tis a little tough to compare 2 disparate things.

Raytracing is early on. Look at UE4 for example. It has only been mainstream in the engine for around 2-3 months ( v4.22 ? ) the majority of people out there arent going to be able to run it on anything less than a 10 series ( and a high 10 series at that ) with acceptable frame rates. I dont know how the training organisations use P3d or not but I would have thought their budgets might not exactly allow for computer upgrades every year or so. I only know of the places near me in Australia and last I popped in there they were installing a "new to them " gtx 960". With LM's focus being training and not consumer... I'd have thought they would try to keep it at the lowest common denominator spec. So whilst I think your ideas on PBR requirement will be on point, I dont think they will jump 2 generation shifts. Especially since raytracing is such a young technology with relatively high requirements.

Ray tracing? In a flight simulator on a PC? Has that ever been discussed anywhere? I can't imagine anyone is thinking about that.

 

[Mach3DS]

Adam Breed stated in a interview that P3Dv5 would be a good time to introduce a new Graphics Engine. Why would you exclude support for the up and coming standard of visual output? They won't. Because the USAF is adopting VR training and anything that makes it look an feel more real is what they and everyone wants. So not having that ability would be a calculated mistake. LM team seems pretty bright. Just because no one has specifically called out "Ray Tracing" doesn't mean that it won't be supported in the future of P3D. It might not be in v5. But I don't count out v5 as being a demarcation line from the old and the new. v4.4 is the trial of PBR. When I mentioned PBR was coming a little while back, I was met with the same kind of skepticism. I fully expect that once the new Graphics engine is in place, "Ray Tracing" technology will eventually make it in. These are the same guys who planned in longevity of the original Flight Sim title. Giving P3D a new graphics engine that supports up and coming technology is the future. Just as PBR is. In fact a single RTX 2080 can render in real time and entire cinematic quality scene because the technology is so efficient on the new hardware.

Regarding the A2A Mustang and the DCS Mustang. Not really Apples and Oranges. They're the same aircraft. DCS rendition is better. If you're looking for a mustang that does everything a Mustang did or does now, its there. Different platform but both are outputting an experience. One is more complete than the other.

Anyway, it's preference. So whatever floats your boat is what's important, and what you should spend your money on IMO.

 

[DennyA]

Ray tracing isn't the old "set your Amiga to spend two hours rendering a single image with reflections" thing it used to be. The new GeForce RTX cards can do it in real time, at decent frame rates. (Though it definitely causes a performance hit!)

Now, back to A2A...

 

[pilto von pilto]

Adam Breed stated in a interview that P3Dv5 would be a good time to introduce a new Graphics Engine. Why would you exclude support for the up and coming standard of visual output? They won't. Because the USAF is adopting VR training and anything that makes it look an feel more real is what they and everyone wants. So not having that ability would be a calculated mistake. LM team seems pretty bright. Just because no one has specifically called out "Ray Tracing" doesn't mean that it won't be supported in the future of P3D. It might not be in v5. But I don't count out v5 as being a demarcation line from the old and the new. v4.4 is the trial of PBR. When I mentioned PBR was coming a little while back, I was met with the same kind of skepticism. I fully expect that once the new Graphics engine is in place, "Ray Tracing" technology will eventually make it in. These are the same guys who planned in longevity of the original Flight Sim title. Giving P3D a new graphics engine that supports up and coming technology is the future. Just as PBR is. In fact a single RTX 2080 can render in real time and entire cinematic quality scene because the technology is so efficient on the new hardware.

Regarding the A2A Mustang and the DCS Mustang. Not really Apples and Oranges. They're the same aircraft. DCS rendition is better. If you're looking for a mustang that does everything a Mustang did or does now, its there. Different platform but both are outputting an experience. One is more complete than the other.

Anyway, it's preference. So whatever floats your boat is what's important, and what you should spend your money on IMO.

I'm not saying that Raytracing isnt coming. I'm saying that the technology ( and the hardware requirement to run it is high - nvidia 2080 ? Yep I got a spare 700 AUD + ) is too young. I'm not saying it wont be a point release in V5. I think they will wait. I think it will be a steady evolution. I also agree that PBR is the future and I too have been pushing for it's use for some time.I just dont think there will be a massive paradigm shift in graphics engines in P3d that would have the effect of "forcing" people/training organisations/commercial interests to get a 20 series video card and other upgrades. It depends on where you sit on the topic of LM's primary purpose of P3D. And that wades too close to the closed off never discuss topic of EULA.

It is apples to oranges sort of. You're on the P3d forum. Can the DCS p51 run in P3D? No. then it isnt a competitor to A2A's version. And the opposite is also true if we were on the DCs forum then the A2A p51 couldnt compete in DCS with the DCS p51 as the A2A cant run in DCS.

anyway as you say it is a preference so whatever floats your boat. I agree there!

 

[FlyingsCool]

Ray tracing isn't the old "set your Amiga to spend two hours rendering a single image with reflections" thing it used to be. The new GeForce RTX cards can do it in real time, at decent frame rates. (Though it definitely causes a performance hit!)

Now, back to A2A...

1st person shooters with a very limited world have A LOT less calculations and scenery to load. Despite what you've seen, we're still a longg way from ray tracing for flight sims. The flight calculations are not insignificant. And frames ahead are not necessarily easy to calculate. I'm imagining you wouldn't be happy with a 5 maybe 10 mile world view... Maybe less. And realistic clouds are probably in your wishlist as well. Imagine the scattering calculations required for that....