peter12213
FSX Acceleration!
Looks like according to facebook the BD5 will be released in 1 or 2 days, can't wait here!
-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
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 politician 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 among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
-
Please see the most recent updates in the "Where did the .com name go?" thread. Posts number 16 and 17.
Very Soon
- Thread starter peter12213
- Start date
strykerpsg
SOH-CM-2023
Looks nice, but I'll pass on this one. At one point, was a huge Iris fan, until they started showing many of their projects, which seemed very promising and then they disappear. Makes me wonder if they jilted some other designers and end result was removal of their project. Anyway, if they would ever consider re-engaging their original designs, such as the F-111, T-6B, C-27 and F-35 would give them another shot. Anyways, here's hoping to a brighter future and hope this one fulfills some James Bondian stunts.
Matt
Matt
Matt, I've been over and over the reasons why certain aircraft are shuffled around during developments so many times both here and on our own forums, but to bring it to the front again, I've summarised at the bottom of this post 
On the aircraft in question though, please take note of the below;
1. F-111. We purchased the F-111F mesh about 3 years ago know if my memory serves me correctly, however a large amount of additional work is required by us to get the aircraft into FSX without sacrificing system performance and accuracy. However, as the project was purchased 'as is', we're now responsible for making those changes, not the company we purchased it from. In addition, a new payware F-111 has been announced for release prior to Christmas which is in a development state further along than ours, so we're waiting to see what that one is like before commiting more development time and money to our F-111 project.
2. T-6B. The T-6B was being developed quite some time ago as a mod for the existing T-6 project, however due to lack of real world resources on the glass displays used in the T-6B, the project was shelved indefinately.
3. C-27J. The C-27 was initially developed for release last year if I recall correctly... as it stands we're still in the process of building the Virtual Cockpit, so that model is some time away as of yet.
4. F-35B. The F-35B was going well in development however licencing costs for the VTOL solution have proven restrictive, and Dino's release of the F-35A also played a part in potential business income from the project. As it stands, the F-35B is still on the boards, but may or may not be swapped for an F-35C.
Yes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and as I've mentioned many times before, would you rather see everything we're working on behind the scenes or nothing at all until a project is finished?
I'm sure you'll find many software houses, be them gaming, FS related or other, have projects which begin well, but for some reason or another never pan out... Our difference is that we're transparent on what's being worked on..sometimes these projects come to fruition, sometimes they don't...and in most cases projects are shuffled around in the order of release for many different reasons such as access to research materials, competing projects, staffing delays and costs of development to name just a few factors. (remember FS aircraft in most cases cost thousands of dollars to develop, both in man hours and outsourcing costs.)
I've asked on many occasions what our customers would like to see us do, and the majority would like to see what we're working on, wether they come to fruition or not, so that's what we do. I apologise if in doing so, we bring some peoples hopes up unnecessarily, however that's the risk taken with transparency.
DB.
On the aircraft in question though, please take note of the below;
1. F-111. We purchased the F-111F mesh about 3 years ago know if my memory serves me correctly, however a large amount of additional work is required by us to get the aircraft into FSX without sacrificing system performance and accuracy. However, as the project was purchased 'as is', we're now responsible for making those changes, not the company we purchased it from. In addition, a new payware F-111 has been announced for release prior to Christmas which is in a development state further along than ours, so we're waiting to see what that one is like before commiting more development time and money to our F-111 project.
2. T-6B. The T-6B was being developed quite some time ago as a mod for the existing T-6 project, however due to lack of real world resources on the glass displays used in the T-6B, the project was shelved indefinately.
3. C-27J. The C-27 was initially developed for release last year if I recall correctly... as it stands we're still in the process of building the Virtual Cockpit, so that model is some time away as of yet.
4. F-35B. The F-35B was going well in development however licencing costs for the VTOL solution have proven restrictive, and Dino's release of the F-35A also played a part in potential business income from the project. As it stands, the F-35B is still on the boards, but may or may not be swapped for an F-35C.
Yes, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and as I've mentioned many times before, would you rather see everything we're working on behind the scenes or nothing at all until a project is finished?
I'm sure you'll find many software houses, be them gaming, FS related or other, have projects which begin well, but for some reason or another never pan out... Our difference is that we're transparent on what's being worked on..sometimes these projects come to fruition, sometimes they don't...and in most cases projects are shuffled around in the order of release for many different reasons such as access to research materials, competing projects, staffing delays and costs of development to name just a few factors. (remember FS aircraft in most cases cost thousands of dollars to develop, both in man hours and outsourcing costs.)
I've asked on many occasions what our customers would like to see us do, and the majority would like to see what we're working on, wether they come to fruition or not, so that's what we do. I apologise if in doing so, we bring some peoples hopes up unnecessarily, however that's the risk taken with transparency.
DB.
I have responded to your PM, however please note that I do not use my PM at sim outhouse for support of our products, as per our website, the IRIS support ticket function should be the first port of call for IRIS products.
http://www.irisfss.com/supportticket/
Thank you for bringing the issue of the e-mail to my attention, this will be addressed as soon as possible.
http://www.irisfss.com/supportticket/
Thank you for bringing the issue of the e-mail to my attention, this will be addressed as soon as possible.
strykerpsg
SOH-CM-2023
David,
Thanks for clarifying the muddy waters more than before. Much of this has been brought up in your forums before, but it usually drew a lock on the thread, which is your perogative I understand. It is also both refreshing and hugely disappointing sometimes allowing your transparency of planned releases. I was one smitten with excitement at the potential of those future releases, as they were all on my must have list. I was mostly suprised by the stopping of the T-6B, which seems to have much more accessible material now than before and most of the work would have just been used with the existing T-6A.
While I think your BD5(I think that's the nomenclature) looks fabulous, just not what I am seeking. I am certain you have put much work into her and whatever details could be put into it exist with quite nicely.
I promise I have no vendetta with you and your team, just more a by product of un-fulfillment that is a byproduct of my own greed or desires. In the end, it is the locked threads that left more questions than answers, so it is a self inflicted wound I carry. Thanks again for re-stating or clarifying the not so obvious of those models.
Matt
Thanks for clarifying the muddy waters more than before. Much of this has been brought up in your forums before, but it usually drew a lock on the thread, which is your perogative I understand. It is also both refreshing and hugely disappointing sometimes allowing your transparency of planned releases. I was one smitten with excitement at the potential of those future releases, as they were all on my must have list. I was mostly suprised by the stopping of the T-6B, which seems to have much more accessible material now than before and most of the work would have just been used with the existing T-6A.
While I think your BD5(I think that's the nomenclature) looks fabulous, just not what I am seeking. I am certain you have put much work into her and whatever details could be put into it exist with quite nicely.
I promise I have no vendetta with you and your team, just more a by product of un-fulfillment that is a byproduct of my own greed or desires. In the end, it is the locked threads that left more questions than answers, so it is a self inflicted wound I carry. Thanks again for re-stating or clarifying the not so obvious of those models.
Matt
warchild
Charter Member
Hey Stryker?? I've got the flight models on all of those including the C-27, with thousands of hours put into developing them including the F-111 which was created with the help of an Australian pig driver and all the non classified data he could feed me.. No worries.. I aint letting any of those fade into history if i can help it. I promise..
Pam
I've got the flight models on all of those including the C-27, with thousands of hours put into developing them including the F-111 which was created with the help of an Australian pig driver and all the non classified data he could feed me.. No worries.. I aint letting any of those fade into history if i can help it. I promise..Pam
strykerpsg
SOH-CM-2023
LOL, thanks for keeping my spirits raised. I wrongly assumed they were much closer to release than happened. Anyway, the Aardvark you guys were working on doesn't compare to the one David posted in another thread.Hey Stryker??
Pam
Matt
warchild
Charter Member
::
: perhaps.. That was three years ago. Thats ok.. its a big world and i dont take up so much space i cant share it with other good modelers and techicians..
Odie
Charter Member
Looks like according to facebook the BD5 will be released in 1 or 2 days, can't wait here!
Now you're talking! Looks like this one will be fun....:mixedsmi:
warchild
Charter Member
heh.. I normally dont call any plane i work on "fun".. usually, like the reviewer said on the A-10's video review, you have to learn to fly them. However, not this one.. David and i agreed that we wanted people to be able to enjoy all the fun aspects of this design, without any of the negative aspects such as its propensity to ground loop, flip and a few other things that can ruin your day.. It's still quite fast on pitch roll and yaw, but remains controllable through the entire range of motion.
I didnt go for extreme realism for several reasons. The plane had terrible flight characteristics.. Aerobatic pilots loved her, normal pilots hated her. Several BD-5j's crashed destroying the plane, and engines were horribly expensive being designed for a cruise missile.. That led to kit builders tossing in a bunch of different engines with different outputs, weights and dynamics.. I used the engine from the blueprints, and i tried to find that balance between aerobatics and sport flying. its a fun plane.. pure and simple, no frills attached.. when i'm not in the P-61 this is going to be one of very few you'll find me in..
Pam
falcon409
SOH-CM-2025
Yep, I have a lot of other planes I fly on a regular basis, but the BD-5J FS9 version is one I fly more often and with this one showing up right on time to catch me when I actually have some money in the bank. . . .woohoo!!
To add to Pam's response;
I was in on this as a beta tester. On first load up and sitting in the office, it felt real comfortable. Everything was easy to reach (go figure..lol) The interior of the cockpit was very quiet and comfortable. Upon going to the outside for a walk-around it's design is sleek and looks very fast. Flying it reminded me of riding a friends cafe' race bike.
I was in on this as a beta tester. On first load up and sitting in the office, it felt real comfortable. Everything was easy to reach (go figure..lol) The interior of the cockpit was very quiet and comfortable. Upon going to the outside for a walk-around it's design is sleek and looks very fast. Flying it reminded me of riding a friends cafe' race bike.
peter12213
FSX Acceleration!
Funnily enough I don't think it will be a very thick manual for this particular aircraft lol