Anyone up for a Halifax ?

[Deano]

Lets hear your thoughts and suggestions.

Im not here to promote anything.. absolutely zilch.

I'll keep it short and sweet.

I would personally love to release a Halifax Bomber as my Great Uncle was a rear gunner who was assigned to special ops, lived throughout the war and became a field marshal.

Any takers ? historians, ARC's interested.. then please post your enthusiasm here.

Tell me what you would like to see in the aircraft and what you consider to be the most important.

Cheers Deano

[RyanJames170]

the WWII bomber right.. i think it would be awesome to be honest.

[Kiwikat]

I'd love a Halifax!

As for what I'd like it to have... one word and everything that goes with it- "Accusim" :mixedsmi:

[Deano]

yes your absolutely right http://www.telusplanet.net/public/dickieb/harry/photos/halifax31024.jpg

[Ferry_vO]

I'm still flying the old AS Halifax in Fs9 and would love to have a new one for FsX!

(It would fit well in the FCS line-up! :monkies: )

[IanP]

Add me to the list for a Halifax... They were used at Sleap for glider tug pilot training (and then as glider tugs) so a Sterling or Halifax would be very nice indeed!

[Deano]

What bugs me most regarding acsum is...


alot of people always say its good but not as good as acusim.. ok thats a fair enough argument..

So are customers actually willing to pay an additional $30 on top of the initial $30 to fly the aircraft isnt this just another means to suck more money out of the customer ?

We tend to offer some full real management, but not on the scale of accusim, is it really worth putting the additional time, effort and money in to something that would only suit some customers ?


I'd love a Halifax!

As for what I'd like it to have... one word and everything that goes with it- "Accusim" :mixedsmi:

[IanP]

Well, if you don't want Accu-Sim, you neither have to have it nor pay for it. It's an add-on, not an essential part of the pack. The aircraft without it are perfectly usable.

So, yes, if people are prepared to pay for the level of depth it adds (and many clearly are) then yes, clearly it's worth doing. However, if you don't want to then you don't have to either. Different things suit different people.

[RyanJames170]

What bugs me most regarding acsum is...


alot of people always say its good but not as good as acusim.. ok thats a fair enough argument..

So are customers actually willing to pay an additional $30 on top of the initial $30 to fly the aircraft isnt this just another means to suck more money out of the customer ?

We tend to offer some full real management, but not on the scale of accusim, is it really worth putting the additional time, effort and money in to something that would only suit some customers ?

i do have to agree with him 100% there..

[spotlope]

What bugs me most regarding acsum is...


alot of people always say its good but not as good as acusim.. ok thats a fair enough argument..

So are customers actually willing to pay an additional $30 on top of the initial $30 to fly the aircraft isnt this just another means to suck more money out of the customer ?

We tend to offer some full real management, but not on the scale of accusim, is it really worth putting the additional time, effort and money in to something that would only suit some customers ?

I think the fact that it only suits some customers is precisely why they offer it as a separate download.

[Deano]

Well, if you don't want Accu-Sim, you neither have to have it nor pay for it. It's an add-on, not an essential part of the pack. The aircraft without it are perfectly usable.

So, yes, if people are prepared to pay for the level of depth it adds (and many clearly are) then yes, clearly it's worth doing. However, if you don't want to then you don't have to either. Different things suit different people.

I totally agree, but when people refer to a particular aircraft saying its good BUT not as good as a accusim model I fell like jumping off of a cliff :icon_lol:

[bkeske]

Oh, that Halifax...

Just caught my eye, as I'm planning my flights to cross 'the pond' to finally check-out GEX Europe, and my first stop before heading up to Goose Bay is Halifax....the other Halifax... :icon_lol:

[Lewis-A2A]

Exactly, its seperate for those that want it. Its modelled to the utmost outside of FSX so the words 'limitations of FSX' are not used during development much, but rather limitations of manpower and time are the issues at hand.

We have real warbird and normal pilots who like to use it and have requested it for actual training purposes with one order for non commercial use in the C97 so we are quite happy by how real we have managed to go with it.

You have to understand the customer bases, also we offer three lines for different customers, from ultra realistic to a nice model with a good FM for a good price.

[Deano]

Lewis.. you sound like a down to earth person.. how should a developer argue the fact that a customer is paying an additional $30+ to have additional engine management and a few additional sounds ?

Fsx limitations.. if its not within the FSX limitations then it wouldnt be already there...

Im trying to thing logically here.

[Lewis-A2A]

Thats an easy one Deano, if Accu-sim is engine man and a few additional sounds to you then Accu-sim isnt for you.

The code that goes into it isnt a case of when gauge a reaches this point then fail componant a which affects componant b and may then fail depending on c, b. Its far more complex, an example is measuring air temps at various points throughout the engine, from entry to exit, it is at no point the same, neither is the pressure, the fuel burn rate etc etc etc. For obvious reasons I cannot go into full detail on exactly what happens but I am sure you get the idea.

Couple this with actual flight physic changes, eg the cubs side slip is a first for FS in regards true behavoir of the aircraft during all phases as the physics are done outside of the engine, then the full suite of sounds that add to the immersion from cockpit sounds to environmental sounds that are dynamic and with Heida some of the FS first true thinking AI (again outside of engine).

ill stop there as I could go on all day. And the limitations of FSX is something ive already seen other developers mention when errors are brought up by customers, so I feel strongly in this area that its worth mentioning, as when the people say we would but we cant due to limitations that makes me wanna jump of a cliff :engel016:

Accu-sim is aimed at the PMDG customer, those that want it 100%, Just as Alphasim has always been known to aim at the decent quality good price customer, decent models, ok VC's and FM's and a good price tag. We havent really ever been in compitition with Alphasim because we cater to different markets just like how the simplified justflight tube liners are not direct compitition to PMDG.
We are a niche market but you have to realise that even within the niche its split up so much into little sub groups Ideally you want to know which product to develop is aimed at which market.

And the price of admission? Well given the products we compete with in the ultra real market we are on a par with them when one includes the Accu-sim module. Without it,... well thats a whole different market and again we are just right in the price range IMO.

[Deano]

so what youve done isnt inside the fsx limitations ?

if not then how can it coincide

if product A is $30 and product B is $30 with the same level of management and then someone then compares product A to accusim (product c) for an additional $30 totally to $60 how is this equal, this is the reason on my post of accusim not to justify what the tempreture is at on the 1st of January at 0 altitude.

[falcon409]

Deano,

Your initial post was to ask for everyone's thoughts on the release of a Halifax for FSX. Somewhere along the way, Accusim was introduced into the conversation and you expressed your concern with that as an additional cost to consumers. Lewis has given his side, you have made your side more than clear. Let's get back to the original subject matter, shall we?

Enough is enough:salute:

[Deano]

Hi Falcon.. Im just carrying on the subject from another users post?

But I totally agree, WAY off topic to much English beer angry emotions you know the rest.

The first words that came out of my wifes mouth was "you'll get banned now, well done" when I started onthe subject of marketing woes

[falcon409]

I understand Deano, no problem. Let's get back to the Halifax, sounds like you have a lot of folks lickin' their chops over the possibilities. Good luck with it:salute:

[Lewis-A2A]

Well for that Dean thats out of our hands what the customers compare stuff too, like the rest of us just grind yer teeth at certain points :kilroy::ernae:

...and more on topic, earlier in the year (2009) myself and a fellow from this very board went for a wonders around and inside the halifax at Yorkshire. Unfortunatly Real Life for both of us has kinda got in the way a bit. Who knows for 2010 though I know hes keen to do it.:mixedsmi:

[Deano]

ahh now it makes sense ;)

So now your saying stay away from the Halifax like scott said on a few additionals that he never told me about ;) after I told him what we was honestly working on.

[Lewis-A2A]

And I believe A2A and RealFlight have a good relationship falcon and we are both British so as it States in Queens rules we must be good at complaining, and werever possible Queue for stuff :P

[Deano]

we did until someone was dishonest ;) kind of slapping someone in the face so to speak.

One thing I am and thats straight upfront, logical and honest, I guess it will be the death of me.

and no I wont disclose the phone conversation on the aircraft topics :D

[Roger]

As a spot view flyer I would balk at an Accusim Halibag. I wouldn't be able to fly it and watch it at the same time. Single engine damage management I can just about cope with but four engine.....too much like hard work and it would stay in the hangar like the Stratocruiser.

[Deano]

I wish it was the case for me Roger, but I get the jaggys I guess Im a good candidate for testing frame rates :D

Anyone need a beta tester ?

[Lewis-A2A]

Nah Roger it wouldnt be Accu-sim if we did one so no worries there, though the cockpit layout is really cool and would be great candidate for a full on simulation.

Dean any worries PM me fella, if I can ill help you out where I can.

[krazycolin]

we did until someone was dishonest ;) kind of slapping someone in the face so to speak.

One thing I am and thats straight upfront, logical and honest, I guess it will be the death of me.

and no I wont disclose the phone conversation on the aircraft topics :D

I'm seriously curious as to who exactly was dishonest...

No, really...

[calypsos]

Your great uncle seems to have been missed by history.

The fact he was a rear gunner in Halifaxes is quite plausable and not in doubt at all, probably within 100 Group. However (and I know family history can change things) to be a Field Marshal (after WW2) he would have had to have left the RAF, joined the army after 1945 and risen to become the top military man in the UK (Chief of the Defence staff) and then retired, as there are no serving Field Marshals in the British army...except possibly Prince Phillip!!!

If he became a pilot, he could have risen to 'Air Rank' that is to say an Air Marshal, but no air gunner ever reached that exalted position in the RAF. The highest ever (and he started as an officer) was a Group Captain in 1945.

Maybe some family history investigation is required.

Oh, I vote for a Halifax too, and a Stirling for that matter in FSX.

[guzler]

Halifax for me toooooooo.

Now stop talking and go n make it :jump: :monkies:

[stiz]

oooooo someone mention halifax?? :monkies:

[AussieMan]

I vote for the Halifax as well. But not let's forget that there are 2 versions of the Halifax. One had, I believe, Bristol Centarus engines and the other had RR Merlins.

Also a Stirling would be great as it seems to be the forgotten aircraft of WWII.

Cheers
Pat

[stiz]

I vote for the Halifax as well. But not let's forget that there are 2 versions of the Halifax.

more than 2 :)

you had

B.1 - Early with nose turret, merlin engines and triangle fins, no top turret
B.2 - Nose turret removed, merline engines and triangle fins, hudson type top turret/BP turret (but not always)
MKII Srs 1.A - full glass nose, merlin engines, square fins, top turret as standard, h2s scanner (fairing on belly)
MKII - glass nose, hercules engines, square fins, top turret, h2s scanner

thats exludeing all the different versions of said engines, the glider tugs with 4 bladed props, paratrop versions, SOE versions, radar versions, post war civi and cargo etc :engel016:

[Lionheart]

more than 2 :)

you had

B.1 - Early with nose turret, merlin engines and triangle fins, no top turret
B.2 - Nose turret removed, merline engines and triangle fins, hudson type top turret/BP turret (but not always)
MKII Srs 1.A - full glass nose, merlin engines, square fins, top turret as standard, h2s scanner (fairing on belly)
MKII - glass nose, hercules engines, square fins, top turret, h2s scanner

thats exludeing all the different versions of said engines, the glider tugs with 4 bladed props, paratrop versions, SOE versions, radar versions, post war civi and cargo etc :engel016:



My goodness man! You are a Halifax Historian! lol... How many dang versions can they have of one single line of planes?

A very flexible airframe.. or rather, diverse.


Bill

[IanP]

Good grief, no Mk.X? I thought all British WW2 aircraft had to have at least ten variations with five engine choices, depending on availability, before 1945. :d

Seriously, a non-Accusim Halifax and/or Sterling would be a lot more use to me than a fully fledged complex panel version. Unfortunately, those of us who would be happy with that will always shout a lot less loudly than those who want - and in some cases around the internet (thankfully rarely here) absolutely demand that everything be absolutely top quality, then complain about the price that has to be charged as a result.

Slightly off topic, but I still really wish there was someone doing <£20 "old Alphasim" style models which were brilliant for AI, great for casual users and most warbird fans while the die-hard systems fans could just say they weren't what they wanted and bypass them.

[guzler]

I just like to get in the plane and fly around. I would get bored pressing lots of buttons and making adjustments to get an engine started. For me, great visuals and a quite realistic flight model keep me happy. A2A have it right, you can get Accusim or not, the choice is with the customer. I bought the P47 and B377 without Accumsim and find them to be about as complex as I would want to go. They're gorgeous planes and I can only praise A2A for creating aircraft that should appeal to both ends of the market.

[Deano]

On a personal note, Stiz.. Honestly I wish you well with the Halifax I'll be buying it and will stand down from working on it.


I'm seriously curious as to who exactly was dishonest...

No, really...

Why would you want to bring this up again?

The conversation was in private and wont be repeated to anyone.

please leave the off topics as they were, no need to get the anger levels running again.

[Deano]

Hi Calypso,

Your prolly right regarding the ranking structure, the rank I gave was a guestimate :isadizzy: The only thing my grandad told me that he flew mainly Hali missions and then a few Lanc missions, survived and then stayed on to be in charge of the airfield, maybe something along the lines of an Army RSM of somekind.

I really do need to get hold of his notes from the yester years as its intrigued me for sometime now.

You seem to know a far bit on the history, is there a place I can search his name (Kenneth Gilmore Greasley)


Your great uncle seems to have been missed by history.

The fact he was a rear gunner in Halifaxes is quite plausable and not in doubt at all, probably within 100 Group. However (and I know family history can change things) to be a Field Marshal (after WW2) he would have had to have left the RAF, joined the army after 1945 and risen to become the top military man in the UK (Chief of the Defence staff) and then retired, as there are no serving Field Marshals in the British army...except possibly Prince Phillip!!!

If he became a pilot, he could have risen to 'Air Rank' that is to say an Air Marshal, but no air gunner ever reached that exalted position in the RAF. The highest ever (and he started as an officer) was a Group Captain in 1945.

Maybe some family history investigation is required.

Oh, I vote for a Halifax too, and a Stirling for that matter in FSX.

[IanP]

You might find this link (PDF) useful if you want to find out more, Deano:

http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/research/documents/e-Info%20Sheet%202%20RAF%20personnel.pdf

[Deano]

Thanks Ian looking through it now.

[TheOptimist]

Coincidentally they have one of the remaining few Halifax bombers at FAR museum Duxford. It's in a pretty sorry state though.

[IanHenry]

I would like a <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" /><st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Halifax</st1:place></st1:City> very much. Indecently there is a very good (non flying) example of the aircraft at Elvington air museum near <st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">York</st1:place></st1:City>. Apparently it was used as a hen house by a farmer for many years. The museum is well worth a visit, it is run by a group of old lads all enthusiastic volunteers. They have done a very good job of preserving the "feel" of this WW2 bomber (<st1:City w:st="on"><st1:place w:st="on">Halifax</st1:place></st1:City>, mostly free French I believe) base.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p> </o:p>
Regards,
Ian.
<o:p> </o:p>

[Ferry_vO]

IIRC there's a third one in Canada and the only one that's complete.
Wasn't the Duxford one raised from a lake and on display just as it was found?

[TheOptimist]

IIRC there's a third one in Canada and the only one that's complete.
Wasn't the Duxford one raised from a lake and on display just as it was found?

Yes, tha Canadian aircraft is the only proper complete halifax.

The Duxford one had a good story. It was shot down by flak on a raid on the Tirpitz. The pilot landed the plane on it's belly on a frozen lake, and all of the crew but one escaped. The engineer was captured I believe.

It's a bit sad seeing it as it is.

There's 5 worldwide I think.

[michael davies]

Slightly off topic, but I still really wish there was someone doing <£20 "old Alphasim" style models which were brilliant for AI, great for casual users and most warbird fans while the die-hard systems fans could just say they weren't what they wanted and bypass them.

Sadly I think those days are long gone, for years thats what Alphasim did, but it got them beat over the head time and time again, forums and in some cases internal voices demanded higher detail, they tried to sing that tune and to be blunt it damn near killed off the business. Any one with a modicum of common sense can see what Alphasim went through and wont tread the same path.

Sadly, the bitter irony is that 90% of the customers who bought Alphasim were very happy with what they got and it was exactly what they wanted, but they, like in almost all circles of life, were the quiet masses and accounted for 10% of the public voice, the 90% of the public disenting voice only made up 10% of the customer base. Hence the closure of Alphasim forums and the virtual total walk off from the forums by most if not all the staff. I serioulsy doubt you'll ever see a pubic face to Alphasim again.

Only now when Alphasim have almost sunk into oblivion (publically) are people now voicing their (true /) fears and wishes.

Part of Alphasims problem was its pricing, leading some to think they were perhaps getting more than they actually were due to the higher price tag and some perhaps, shall we say, enthusiastic product descriptions :). The higher cost was perhaps due to the import nature of some of its models, however at that time it was the only way to be able to publish models at a regular pace, strangely many others seemed to opt for the same path but reading the under tow here and in PMs it seems many development houses are going back to in house design, an effort to keep costs down ?, or to more easily control the products detail, it takes almost as much to convert some of the imports than it does to build a fresh yourself these days.

Alphasim did many things wrong, but they also did much more right, sadly its only the wrong that ever gets remembered, to the victors goes the spoils to write the history books.

Regarding Accumsim, I'm afraid I side with Dean, thats not to say Accusim is bad or wrong, it isnt, its a terrific concept and they can take all the accolade duly received for its design and inception, but its not for everyone and anything not Accusim isnt always bad.

Halifax, best of luck LOL, make sure you get it right, theres nothing better than an english WWII bomber to bring the critics to the fore :), normally with the best interests at heart, but occasionally not !.

[Chuck_Jodry-VJPL]

Collusion is a dirty word , its intent within this field is to remove competition by limiting choice and that seems to be the situation with respect to the Halifax and by extension to an undisclosed number of other aircraft.
Each product brings a unique set of features , the modellers skills , texture artists talents as well as the flight dynamics are all unique to a given production and having pre arranged “ no fly zones “ isn’t doing the consumer of FS addons any favour , in the interest of competition keeping us on our toes i would like to see as many Halifax Bombers or whatever suits the fancy of the artists that produce them as possible.

[IanP]

I agree with both you and Chuck, Michael, but Alphasim shot themselves in the foot by trying to change markets and, as you say, charging more for the models than most of their userbase were prepared to - or able to - pay. The quality undoubtedly went up, but as is usually the case, most of those that wanted the increased quality wanted it at the same price they had always paid and that simply wasn't possible. Although I'm more than aware that you know more about what went on than I do, that seems to be the story from outside... Feel free to tell me I'm wrong!

What I will say regarding your comments, Chuck, is that as we've seen on a number of occasions, the first to market with an effectively identical product tends to be the "winner". In some instances, companies will have a very supporting fan base (e.g. PMDG, LDS, A2A) that will hold out for one specific company's product, but those who just want "a model" will buy the first one out that they can afford and that section of the market is lost for anyone else who comes in.

It is always those least happy with a product that shout the loudest, unfortunately. Those who are happy just tend to be using it and don't shout about it long and hard from the roof tops unless it is particularly special.

Incidentally, I have always been one of the people saying that there are people in this hobby who will appreciate a massive range of complexity. I happily used models from Alphasim through to PMDG and would continue to do so... except that there are far fewer of the former than there used to be and increased costs mean that there's no way I can afford anywhere near as much as I could. Unfortunately there's nothing at all that a developer can do about that - complexity increases mean cost increases... then we still call it "progress" even when we can't afford to do it any more! :icon_lol:

[calypsos]

Your prolly right regarding the ranking structure, the rank I gave was a guestimate :isadizzy: The only thing my grandad told me that he flew mainly Hali missions and then a few Lanc missions, survived and then stayed on to be in charge of the airfield, maybe something along the lines of an Army RSM of somekind.

I really do need to get hold of his notes from the yester years as its intrigued me for sometime now.

You seem to know a far bit on the history, is there a place I can search his name (Kenneth Gilmore Greasley)


That makes a lot more sense!

He probably re-mustered to the GD (discipline) branch after the war and became a SWO (Station Warrant Officer) who is in charge (well they think so anyway) of the day to day running of the station. A sort of RAF RSM is a good description.
They are the senior non-commisioned officer and are often known as right b......rds!! Not all are like this, my first SWO was a super guy, also an ex-Air Gunner (Pathfinder Lancs) who actually said 'Good Morning' when he past you....instead of 'get your hair cut'!!!

You can trace a lot of RAF records on the various family history websites in the UK, or have a day to Kew in south London (NRO) where you can search his records free of charge, if you make an appointment.

[Deano]

haha Calypsos, your so right... my grandad said that he wasnt the most liked person :icon_lol:

[michael davies]

Collusion is a dirty word , its intent within this field is to remove competition by limiting choice and that seems to be the situation with respect to the Halifax and by extension to an undisclosed number of other aircraft.
Each product brings a unique set of features , the modellers skills , texture artists talents as well as the flight dynamics are all unique to a given production and having pre arranged “ no fly zones “ isn’t doing the consumer of FS addons any favour , in the interest of competition keeping us on our toes i would like to see as many Halifax Bombers or whatever suits the fancy of the artists that produce them as possible.

Chuck, interesting parody there, I agree with what your saying, in the good old days, can we still call it that ?, it was called baggsies, those that bagged an aircraft effectively told everyone else to back off, most would, some did not. With time it has been realized that many previews came to nothing, cruelly called vapor ware, some no doubt was to keep competition at bay the rest probably failed for genuine reasons.

I've seen other recent backing off from other developers, quite a lot actually, its now called not treading on others toes :). Call it what you may but the commercial sector is certainly guilty of carving up the market, I doubt any of it planned or calculated, most is by natural selection, some developers aim at tube liners, others at WWII, others at modern military, others at GA, generally all stick to their forte's, but occasionally someone will cut across some one else's bow and warning shots or brief skirmish's will occur, its been going on for a long time, its nothing new.

The tactic is only an issue if you believe it to be so, I've dropped many a project because another has previewed something similar, however as time has proved, its not over until the fat lady sings, an egg does not make an omelet and much that I shelved never came from the other source.

This situation seems only to be the preserve of the military fraternity, tube liner fans and developers seem to build, collect anything thats developed, theres no issue with duplication there, Boeing's and Airbuses abound and as such each needs to be a cut above the previous.

Tube liners are generally accepted as being more in depth than military stock, maybe thats because of the duplication and fierce rivalry, perhaps thats what the military market needs ?. Certainly the gentlemanly walking around others and carving up the market place makes for an easy environment, but, as you rightly say, its not helping the community and its (tongue in cheek) perhaps not forcing developers to push that little bit harder, if anyone feels that last comment is out of context then think of any developer who primarily aims at the military market and put them head to head with the likes of PMDG or Capt Sim. That doesn't mean that the military market is lazy or cant do it, it could mean that the market doesn't actually want what the civil market wants, the military market could be perfectly happy with what they now have, you tailor your skills and wares to the perceived market.

As Ian points out, first to market generally wins, thats a subjective conclusion to which we may never prove or disprove, Alphasims Intruder was first to market, but did Razbam suffer ?, perhaps a little, but Razbam also targeted another market that Alphasim doesn't. Initially I was against duplication, but with time can see that it is an important driving force and have seen that frequently that which starts out in competition often isn't at the end due to drop outs and withdrawals.

So make more Halifax's, the more that start then the bigger the chance one will cross the finish line, and if two finish, well then you have the choice to choose which ever suits your own needs, doubtless neither will be the same or target the same audience.

[IanP]

Alphasim's Intruder is possibly not the best example as many Intruder fans were put off by what were true glaring errors - or glowing exhausts which in that instance are one and the same - and the high price. You could easily buy two Razbam Intruders and get a lot more variants for the cost of just the Alpha A-6E. I'd put that under "buying the first one they can afford" of my point above, personally.

Certainly in freeware and usually in payware, there's more than enough space in the market for two developers to produce the same aircraft, it's only when there are three, four or five that it starts getting past viable for payware and it never gets past viable for freeware - unless you are one of the developers who constantly watches download counts, which many do. It's also still true that half or a third of the market for a B747 or an A320 is vastly more than the entire market for most warbirds. I've never met a developer of military models who hasn't said that on numerous occasions - normally followed by "if I wanted money I'd have done a B737. I do this because I like military aircraft." ;)

[michael davies]

edit

[Ferry_vO]

Could we go back to discussing the possibility of a Halifax for FsX, rather than picking apart Alphasim's business strategy..?

:monkies:

Those kind of treads never end well...

[Chuck_Jodry-VJPL]

“Baggsies” i like that term , and it does describe what was the case in the good old days but falls short when applied to phone calls by a given production house to a majority of the others to pre arrange their release plans so as to preclude overlap , that defines collusion .
<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
Vapour Ware , is another term that i find suits the case of work that never materializes and am i guilty of that , perhaps more guilty than many with completed versions of Hurricanes , a Jet Star , the Navajo , Lancaster MIII , Powered Gliders and more to my eternal shame.
<o:p></o:p>
The Preview on the other hand is an asset, invaluable to getting a production into a position to compete favourably with another product of the same or nearly the same thing, i am making the greatest mileage currently from the pre release photos by ensuring that the work i am doing surpasses in every respect the offerings of the competition.<o:p></o:p>
And there lies the crux of my observation, in a market driven by competitive forces , removal of competition can only lead to a reduction in quality and an increase in prices as the distributor of a given product has less impetus to compete on all levels .
<o:p></o:p>
The Military Aircraft market is indeed a world unto itself , offerings cover all the bases and in some cases raise the standards of the entire industry, the Aero L39C by LotusSim being a case in point, its landing lights were the subject of great scrutiny and now that a number of productions are making use of the methodology it’s going to become the standard to which all releases are held and as there are a number of them coming nobody will be accused of copying, thus the consumer group as a whole benefits.
<o:p></o:p>
The bottom line for me is this, competitive forces drive the market to surpass expectations and in the long term will take FSX into the stratosphere, any effort to preclude competitive forces is going to do more harm in the long run than any other single factor.



Sorry about that Ferry_vO i was typing while you posted and didnt see your admonishment to return to the topic at hand<o:p></o:p>

[Tako_Kichi]

UKMIL posted a first WIP shot of a FSX Halifax over at CBFS today and very nice it looks too. So it appears there will be at least one after all! :applause:

[Paul K]

There is no Halifax at Duxford. I think you are referring to the one at the RAF museum, Hendon