• There seems to be an up tick in Political commentary in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site we know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religiours commentary out of the fourms.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politicion will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment amoung members. It is a poison to the community. We apprciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Why isn't there any serious business jet in the FSX add-ons catalog ?

Cleartheprop

Cleartheprop

Charter Member
Why isn't there any serious business jet in the FSX add-ons catalog ?

I know some light jets have been released for FSX, such as the Flight1 Cessna Mustang, the EagleSoft Citation II/CJ, the Raython 400A, some heavier airplanes as the Citation X, or the Embraer Legacy/135/145 released by Wilco but I have seen no Falcon 20/50/900/2000 (Ex, Easy), no Dassault 7X, no Gulfstream, no Challengers for FSX.
What could be the reason for this lack of interest in business aviation ?
 
For one they are more complex than anything else out there. The Gulfstream planeview system makes the PMDG MD-11, VRS F-18, and Flight1 Citation Mustang look like toys. The amount of money and talent it would take to pump out a system that doesn't absolutely annihilate your FPS would be off the charts, if possible at all.

Commercial jets sell more so why spend more on more complex aircraft when you can make a commercial jet and sell tens of thousands of copies?

I'd love to see more of the big name business jets but I think the smaller Eaglesoft offerings will be the only ones to hit the market. I love their Citation X 2.0, especially after the 3D VC update. :ernae:
 
CodyValkyrie said:
Of note, some of those companies are KEEPING developers from making addons.
Click to expand...

I didnt know that such manufacturers could keep developpers from making add-ons based on their aircrafts.

A freeware Falcon 50 has been developped for FS2002 (I think) then upgraded for FS9 and X but although the exterior shape was nice, the VC and airplane systems were far away from the real thing. (and the flight model was quite unrealistic).

The systems complexity of these jets is similar to any airliner sytems which are successfully developped by PMDG, and so on.
 
..give us some time..:jump:..got a new coder in the ranks, studying the possibilities, we´ll have a whole new web site and some new interesting news, while we are still 100% military and most specific naval aircraft intended, i see some tubes and biz jets in RAZBAM future..

Best regards

Prowler
 
There USED to be a serious business jet, but it was for FS9 and made by Ariane. Even though the plane itself was a class act, there was so much irrelevant mud being slung at them at the time it wasnt funny, so hardly anyone bought it.. Ariane has since not updated their BBJ for FSX, and has stuck to just tubes.. Extremely NICE tubes, but tubes, like everyone else... Personally, i miss being able to head back to the cabin and relax on those long flights as i watch the clouds roll by..
 
MirageIII2009 said:
I didnt know that such manufacturers could keep developpers from making add-ons based on their aircrafts.

A freeware Falcon 50 has been developped for FS2002 (I think) then upgraded for FS9 and X but although the exterior shape was nice, the VC and airplane systems were far away from the real thing. (and the flight model was quite unrealistic).

The systems complexity of these jets is similar to any airliner sytems which are successfully developped by PMDG, and so on.
Click to expand...

I believe your talking about the Falcon 50 that was available.. I cant speak for any part of its reality, but i gotta admit, it was one very fun airplane to fly :) ...
 
We are lacking a good Gulfstream and Falcon series(Falcon 50/900/2000). It does seem unlikely that we will ever see these modeled because of CodyValkyrie mentioned above. For whatever reasons, being that obtaining a license from these companies is a bit steep cost wise or they perhaps may not want such a product made bearing their name. Who knows!

If someone does end up making one, I would be inclined to buy it.
 
I'd love a good GV, always loved that design. Make it and call it a goodstream or something, I can call it what I like after it's made, LOL.
 
MCDesigns said:
I'd love a good GV, always loved that design. Make it and call it a goodstream or something, I can call it what I like after it's made, LOL.
Click to expand...

Uh no, I'm sorry to say that won't work. Try making a soft drink and naming it Coke-A-Coola or opening a hamburger chain with green arches and calling it McDanalds. Copyright protections extend far beyond the name of the product. Make a Goofstream G-V and then sit back and wait for the cease and desist order to arrive.
 
deathfromafar said:
For whatever reasons, being that obtaining a license from these companies is a bit steep cost wise or they perhaps may not want such a product made bearing their name. Who knows!
Click to expand...

having seen "one of those letters", I know. There are phrases like 'no replication of the logo', no 'visual modeling of the likeness', 'no representation of any mark or corporate identity', 'no identification of or with the products of...' -some then discuss licensing fees, others are flat refusals or 'cease and desist' threats. Most certainly some manufacturers are benign toward the Flight Sim world and others are even generous and helpful, but as 'small-shop' modelers, who wants/dares to test the legal departments of large corporations looking for billable hours?

BTW, the corp. world is funny/sad too... I've also seen the 'cease and desist' letters go out to guys posting photos of corp. airplanes on the web (won't hold water, although there is a legal opinion that it might if people were visible embarking/disembarking and could be identified)

As well, there's a market issue. Granted some of the tubeliner guys would buy (but some only see careers as Airline Pilots!, not corp. taxi drivers), some of the warbird and Golden Age guys might spring the buck but perhaps a smaller buck than for the latest, greatest piston-popper -or they wait for the one particular aircraft out of a hundred so which one wins?

Granted, those of us who love anything with wings are more amenable, but remember that the FS community can be pretty fractured so the market for a "less-exciting" (not as big as an Airbus, to clean for a Wasp lover, too genteel for the warbird guys) is likely going to be smaller relative to the development time for a high-quality model (and we keep hearing that all models must be near perfect :isadizzy:).

We'll see some of them as time goes on, but look at FS9.. there are still huge gaps in the catalog after 7 years. Today, the factories are often still grinding out the 5th Mustang, third Corsair, 20th tube to get a share of the bigger markets that are well-known. You know what happens if a shop builds something a bit 'different'.. there are immediately hundreds of post saying "nice, but I wanted a.... and I have a budget"

BTW, I'm holding out for an early Sabreliner and/or an AeroCommander/Rockwell 1123) :jump: AND I'm on a budget...

Rob
 
LCSims said:
Uh no, I'm sorry to say that won't work. Try making a soft drink and naming it Coke-A-Coola or opening a hamburger chain with green arches and calling it McDanalds. Copyright protections extend far beyond the name of the product. Make a Goofstream G-V and then sit back and wait for the cease and desist order to arrive.
Click to expand...

LOL We had a franchise submarine sandwich shop around here called MR SUB. One of the owners decided to go independent (legally) but to save a big of $$ on his costly illuminated sign he did a bit of scraping and a bit of tape work and became MP. SUBS --- they got him :gameoff:
 
LCSims said:
Uh no, I'm sorry to say that won't work. Try making a soft drink and naming it Coke-A-Coola or opening a hamburger chain with green arches and calling it McDanalds. Copyright protections extend far beyond the name of the product. Make a Goofstream G-V and then sit back and wait for the cease and desist order to arrive.
Click to expand...

I understand your point LC, but your analogy is skewed since what you mention is competing products for the same customer group, unlike making a 3d model for use in a game which in no way affects the real product. Copyrights are one thing, but this is just plain assinine.

At $129, I highly doubt any licensing went on here for this model
http://www.turbosquid.com/3d-models/3ds-max-gulfstream-aircraft-g650/488152
 
srgalahad said:
BTW, I'm holding out for an early Sabreliner and/or an AeroCommander/Rockwell 1123) :jump: AND I'm on a budget...

Rob
Click to expand...

I'll be honest.. I really wouldnt mind seeing an AC-690-10 done to Miltons standards or beyond ( i dont think you can get better than his work ).. its a great plane, even if a bit complex to fly..
 
I would love to see a Falcon 7, GV or a Global Express as well. I wonder if PMDG could include a BBJ in their 737NG series. Tho I am sure they would feel they would have to make a whole new interior for it...ie gold plated toilets or somthing of that nature which would be a lot more work.

Maybe Bill could come of with one of his beautiful conceptual designs of a large long range business jet. I know its a bit of a long shot but if someone is looking for a really neat 'concept' to try, the Carreidas 160 from the TinTin comic Flight 714. It was a fictional supersonic swingwing trijet that looked like a souped up Falcon.

Cheers
TJ

View attachment 6379
 
There are plenty of devs, commercial and free, producing modern jet stuff for FSX. You don't hear about much here because really this is a combat forum. It's in the name if you think about it. "Combat Flight Center"

If you're going to go fishing for commercial jets, whatever the size, I would suggest you're at the wrong pond.:wiggle:
 
bazzar said:
There are plenty of devs, commercial and free, producing modern jet stuff for FSX. You don't hear about much here because really this is a combat forum. It's in the name if you think about it. "Combat Flight Center"

If you're going to go fishing for commercial jets, whatever the size, I would suggest you're at the wrong pond.:wiggle:
Click to expand...

Thanks for your input Bazzar, just let you know that this forum is not my only source of information; and there is definitely no Falcon 50/900/2000 for FSX. (I mean accurate/realistic/systems oriented add-ons).
Regarding Dassault copyright (to pinpoint this manufacturer), there are many Dassault fighters in FSX (Freewares and Paywares). the systems are not simulated but the image of the manufacturer is used and displayed. I dont see why civilian airplanes would be more restricted.
 
sir galahad, i think you make some good points in post # 13. it makes me wonder if all of those things are legal/enforceable. i know that often corporate lawyers will try to bluff and bully their will onto people they percieve to be without the funds or general will to fight back, because most little guys will roll over rather than risk.

however, if some freeware guy did make a plane that looked like a gulfstream but was not labeled as one,
i wonder if gulfstream would bother going after them, if they even found out about it. after all, proof of intent is on them. if no $$ is being made, and their logo/image isn't being used, i suspect it would be hard to argue that their rights had been infringed, and one would have to also wonder if it was worth pursuing. just because some lawyer does a little saber-rattling with a cease and desist order doesn't neccessarily mean it's legal. it wasn't issued by a court or a judge, but by a lawyer with corporate interests in mind
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top