Yes, a Canadian bubble version will be available.
It's always puzzled me as to why DH UK and the RAF chose to go with that framed canopy when the blown Canadian bubble version is clearly superior (forgive the pun). I can't see any advantage in it and, not to trash anyone, it just ruins the look of a very smart, clean looking aircraft IMO. I do hope Just Flight includes the Canadian bubble version; I think I'll pass if otherwise...
N.
PS. I noticed that the FSX version of Rick Piper's superb FS9 Chippie lacked the bubble version as well. Pity...
PPS. Speaking of canopies, I would love to know why Lockheed never opted for bubble canopies on later models of the P-38 Lightning (J-model on...) or why Republic fitted heavily framed ones to their early F-84's. It's not like blown canopies were new technology by that point. If any one knows the reasoning behind those I'd like to hear...
If this new one had been produced by A2A - I would have been raving over it's realism, it's textures, it's documentation, and its flight model, and so on; however...this one is so typical of a Just Flight product - all the advertising would indicate an aircraft of A2A quality, but instead we are treated to another aircraft which is constructed almost entirely from graphic art instead of actual 'photos of the real thing.
Does Just Flight think we are blind?
For me, this offering is a disappointment; Just Flight could - and should have done much better.
Seriously??
For starters, I see no "offering" here - just a number of WIP images, for crying aloud.
Indeed, if we're going to talk about "having done much better", why not try this on for size. How about taking all the alleged insider experience/perspective, and approach JF with an offer of constructive input? At the very least, give a developer the benefit of the doubt while its WIP - rather than judge the product as if it had already been released.
A very disappointing example to set.
For my part, I'm quite excited about an FSX Chippie too, having had some very fond memories in one many years ago. I too, welcome the blown canopy, though would not consider it a deal breaker. With the considerable amount of material available for both privately and museum-held examples, I'm hopeful that a fairly accurate model(s) set is feasible for JF.
DL
Pardon?? I'll be the judge of any example which I choose to set - not you or anyone else. If you've at all followed the ascendancy of the DX10 api as it applies to FSX - you'll know what kind of example I've been setting.A very disappointing example to set.
Well, I guess I am the only nit-picker here! While I love the Rick Piper version, you're all correct - it is a "dated" aircraft model, and it shows - and it is about time someone did an updated version. I dislike that blurry, dented and worn instrument panel intensely - believing Rick could have found a much better VC panel than he did. However - it is what it is, and has given hundreds (thousands?) of simmers some great hours of Chippie experience - especially those who have the Bernt Stolle FDE.
If this new one had been produced by A2A - I would have been raving over it's realism, it's textures, it's documentation, and its flight model, and so on; however...this one is so typical of a Just Flight product - all the advertising would indicate an aircraft of A2A quality, but instead we are treated to another aircraft which is constructed almost entirely from graphic art instead of actual 'photos of the real thing.
Does Just Flight think we are blind? That we have no knowledge of airfoil sections? Or experience of the full-sized Chippie? The airfoil on the original (and on Rick's) is very different to the boxy "effort" they have created: the r/w (and R. P's) Chip has washout-out - and - undercamber - at the tips. If Rick P. et al could create this wing (FSX version) some eight years ago - why cannot JF achieve the same - or better?
Still on the wing - r/w fabric looks nothing like that depicted on the yellow liveried aircraft. Only by moving in close to the wing should one actually perceive any weave. On top of this - there's sag between the ribs???? What the devil?? There should be zero fabric sag anywhere on the wing; indeed - the only part where ribs are somewhat pronounced - is on the rudder. Other noticeable points - the square(ish) noses.... the not-very-round rear fuselage... the "Lift here" hole, missing from all fuselages - all picked out from eight or nine small pics.
In it's defense - I have to say the interior shots look pretty good - better than Ricks, in fact, and will do for me until I see the finished product. The exteriors, however - are abysmal.
I love the old girl: she was my first back in 1957, and went on to both scare the pants off me, and to most often amaze and delight me. Truly a Pilot's aircraft.
For me, this offering is a disappointment; Just Flight could - and should have done much better. Or maybe this is just me?
Apologies for being a wet blanket - I would have much preferred warm and cuddly, for sure.
pj
Our DHC-1 Chipmunk for FSX and P3D v1/v2 will be available next week and this all-new aircraft will be a treat for anyone wishing to fly a great new model of the famous twin-cockpit post-war trainer.
The Chipmunk will come in nine military and civilian HD paint schemes, with special textures on the wing surfaces for a realistic ‘stretched, doped linen’ appearance and will feature a fully functional virtual cockpit as well as a 2D panel, optional navigation instruments in the rear cockpit, working emergency canopy release, correctly animated flying surfaces, animated pilots and a functional P8 compass - see the Chipmunk page for a video and the full feature list.
This new Chipmunk will be priced at just £9.99 / €12.95 / $14.99 for an introductory period (normal price £14.99 / €18.95 / $21.99) and shortly after release a Royal Canadian Air Force variant with a 'bubble' canopy will be available FREE to all buyers. Larger than the standard version, and with less framework, the canopy on this variant is designed to provide an ever better field of view.
With all due respect for your opinion, but have you ever considered the fact that the majority of the FS-market may not care for a "hardcore" A2A-type simulation and that companies like JF simply cater for that specific (and BTW much larger) market?