• 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

  • 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.

New A2A Development Video

P

pilottj

Blues is Life
Hey Guys,

Here is the nice new A2A development update vid from Scott. The Cherokee is looking very nice...and hold the phone...just a glimpse...could there be a possible A2A Bonanza in the works?? :applause:

Cheers
TJ
 
Am sure I'll buy it as will be supporting a developer that is epic but the A2A warbirds get much more flying time that the Cessna I own.
 
I understand the sentiment here. Nothing quite beats the thrill of a screaming warbird. I forsee the A2A P-40B being a favorite of mine for as long as FSX is installed on my HD. Going from a P-51 to a 172 is like going from a Ferrari to a Corolla. There is a real positive to A2A's GA trend. Try to look at it this way, we as warbird fans should encourage A2A to really go to town with the GAs. Here is why.

Lets face it, we are a niche group within a niche hobby, compared to the relative sales/popularity of tubeliners and GAs. Don't quote me on this, perhaps Lewis or someone could clarify, but as I understand it, the 172 basically outsold all of A2A's previous releases like within the first week. I don't work for A2A, but these are just some observations. Accusim is like A&P Mechanic level of systems depth and requires field trips to working examples of the subject aircraft. That costs $$$, even more so with vintage GAs and warbirds as they are fewer and farther between. Does anyone know how much a few hours stick time in the Collins Foundation F-4 costs, let alone travel expenses and other R&D costs. How much does a T-33 cost per hour? I would imagine it would be pretty penny for sure. The amount of R&D required to put accusim into a supersonic jet fighter or any complex airplane would be excessive to say the least, certainly without doing 'simpler' projects first as stepping stones.

So A2A has tapped in to a real proverbial gold mine with the GA and Training market. They have endorsements from real world GA groups, so they have certainly made themselves known. Would it make sense to pursue this market to generate the revenue that could go towards the exciting but costly warbird projects? So lets hope that the Cherokee and any other A2A GA project is a big seller.

And not to fear, there are awesome groups like CH, FR, Milviz, Razbam, WS, Aerosoft and so on who do take their time to create these beautiful war machines in the meantime. The future is bright for FSX:mixed-smiley-010:

Cheers
TJ
 
I completely understand why A2A are doing this,it's going to be very popular and I'm sure it will be a superb model, but for me it's going to be a "no sale" as I'm just not interested in the type no matter how well it's simulated. I do have the 172, but it's rarely flown. I'm all for supporting developers, but if I'm paying money it must be on something I actually want. If they ever release that Spitfire mkV I'll be at the front of the queue!
 
So perhaps Cessna is selling well! Pity than no any new warbird from A2A for me only :applause: ,
 
Of course it's going to be popular. Just like the Cessna 172. Popular and very safe (boring) to fly, good for VFR/IFR flight with that "nothing can ever happen" feeling, just like when flying their Cub.
It was an excellent idea from A2A to make GA aircrafts, we all asked for this for years. However, from what I remember, people were shouting for GA aircrafts like the Beaver, the Goose, the Spartan, the DC-3, the C195 etc.... aircrafts with interesting engines, not only interesting gauges...
 
I still think the A2A F-104 and F-4 will eventually get to us, but probably 3-5 years out at least. That being said, there is every reason to believe the Milviz F-4 will be a fantastic simulation. Aerosoft has an EE Lightning in the works which should be great. Both Milviz and Aerosoft have shown they can make great systems deep aircraft. For a relative 'niche' group compared to rest of this hobby, we do get a lot of great releases.

Cheers
TJ
 
Sim Skunk works do an outstanding F-104 and am sure the Milviz F-4 will be excellent too.

A2A might be able to expand and still push out niche aircraft whilst paying the mortgage with their GA planes.

A2A Lanc, A2A B-25, A2A DC-3, A2A Caribou, nom nom nom...... :)
 
Daube said:
Of course it's going to be popular. Just like the Cessna 172. Popular and very safe (boring) to fly, good for VFR/IFR flight with that "nothing can ever happen" feeling, just like when flying their Cub.
It was an excellent idea from A2A to make GA aircrafts, we all asked for this for years. However, from what I remember, people were shouting for GA aircrafts like the Beaver, the Goose, the Spartan, the DC-3, the C195 etc.... aircrafts with interesting engines, not only interesting gauges...
Click to expand...

I fully agree,

Pity they switched to the boring stuff. A more interesting GA to add: the Tigermoth. And why did they never build any accusim Luftwaffe aircraft like the Ju88 and He111 or the rather unknown He217 Greif?

I'll never buy any present GA stuff from A2A, that's for sure.... Fortunately Virtavia took over with a quite nice B29 and a Avro Lincoln on the way. And accusim can be simulated with the freeware realengine program.

Happy flying,

Paul
 
Well, yes and no.
I know the "DamageMod" quite well and I'm using since it was first released. It's VERY nice but cannot be compared with Accusim. The pleasure of getting your Spitfire or P51 engine to idle nicely is totally absent from any other addon, freeware or payware.
That pleasure is also totally absent from their C172, and it will be absent from their Cherokee, and it will be absent from the C182 they are going to insert in the queue in front of the T-33.

I was a bit dissappointed when I learned they inserted the T-33 in front of the F-104. But then, thinking about it, the T-33 is quite a beautifull aircraft, and it has this "early jets" touch which might make it very interesting to use. But this plane won't be done before at least 2 years...
 
ftl818 said:
the rather unknown He217 Greif?
Click to expand...

Most probably it is 'rather unknown' because the never was a He217 ;)

Personally I appreciate it very much that more civil airplanes are approaching now, especially as FSX is a civil flightsim :)
 
Seems that if A2A stays on this course they are playing into the development of the P3D Platform more and more. Given that P3D is first and foremost a "Training Platform" and given the level of immersion of the A2A GA aircraft since the inception of the Accusim and Accufeel modules, it seems a perfect match. I can't help but think that P3D is their ultimate goal for these aircraft. . .make them FSX native, but look ahead to P3D and where that platform is headed. Flight Schools around the country, utilizing P3D for their training scenarios will pay big bucks for GA aircraft that have the level of realism built into A2A aircraft. Not saying they're leaving the FSX world behind. . .but I do think their choice of aircraft shows that they are looking beyond FSX.
 
I agree, Falcon. I'd go a step farther - I think the high-end developers (A2A, PMDG, ORBX) are going to be focused more and more on professional training applications. It makes good economic sense - you sell licenses in large batches instead of one at a time, and you provide customer support to businesses instead of ill- tempered consumers. In other words, wholesale, not retail. It's much more profitable. I think that in the future, us hobbyists are going to be using products that fell off the professional truck - a sort of training dividend. The irony is that a highly profitable A2A might be able to hire more developers and produce more warbirds this way than if they'd stuck with a hobbyist focus. Not saying it's guaranteed. But the potential is there.
 
Yep, I would certainly agree with that. I don't know that A2A would necessarily voice that opinion openly, but even though FSX and even FS9 still have a huge following, most would have to admit that these platforms are stagnant as far as any long term development and updates. . . if there is a future for Flight Simulator, it will be driven by Lockheed Martin and the P3D technology. . .at least for the foreseeable future.
 
ftl818 said:
And accusim can be simulated with the freeware realengine program.

Happy flying,

Paul
Click to expand...

Not quite. In fact, not by a long shot. I use real engine on some aircraft. It is a big improvement for some aircraft.
I also have several accusim aircraft. These aircraft in addition to a realistic engine and flight dynamics, also age over time. And how bout the active flight crew with the 17 and 377.
 
robert41 said:
Not quite. In fact, not by a long shot. I use real engine on some aircraft. It is a big improvement for some aircraft.
I also have several accusim aircraft. These aircraft in addition to a realistic engine and flight dynamics, also age over time. And how bout the active flight crew with the 17 and 377.
Click to expand...
RealEngine is just a "real time" monitor of the engine performance. It will simulate some effects on the engine in case you make mistakes, but it will not simulate "aging" as you said, because at each flight you get a new engine.

The "DamageMod" however, does record the wear of the engine and various plane organs, just like Accusim. It also does what Real Engine does, regarding the effects on the engine, and it brings some new effects and sounds which are excellent for the immersion. Still, it's far from what Accusim can do. But for a freeware, it is really a gem !
 
My A2A B-17 has over 1150 hours on the airframe and all the engines except #2. I had to completely overhaul that one about 1050 hours ago :)

Now that I have passed that thousand-hour mark, little things are needing attention more frequently. There is usually something in the 'yellow'
after most 4-5 hours flights. lately I have been doing some 10 -12 hours hops as well and am thinking "It is time to start reviewing emegency
procedures!" :)

The Accu-Sim wear and failure variables are many and any 'abuse' of the aircraft is going to take it's toll eventually, if not immediately.

Paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top