C-17 Globemaster III

[noddy]

Up date from Alphasim site.

Mar 13th

C-17 Globemaster III status report ! An interim version (v1.05) including the 2D panel suite (and hopefully some new texture sets) is due for release later this month, all being well. The VC work has repeatedly stalled due to lack of finance. General low sales and a poor return on the C-17 version 1.0 has left funds gravely depleted. Efforts had to be switched to some new FSX model packages for release through a 3rd party publisher in order to obtain the necessary funding for the expensive items needed to complete the C-17 cockpit. We apologise for the long wait and bad estimates. As a company we are not in good shape right now, so we ask for just a little more patience as we attempt to complete this project while we still can. The whole of April and May are set aside for non-stop C-17 work, no other projects are scheduled for that period, so the VC should be ready by the end of May

[falcon409]

Have to say, that's pretty "up front" of them to admit. I hope they can get it finished and it's eventually successful for them. For me tho, just points out why buying an exterior on the promise that the rest will be delivered eventually isn't always an "iron clad guarantee".:salute:

[Quixoticish]

I'll believe in the VC when I see it, and I'll also buy then, not before.

As a die hard cynic I'm left wondering if poor sales of the 1.05 interim release will be the excuse used in May when the VC is still not finished.

[BOOM]

WOW!!! What a HUGE disappointment! I would be really pissed if I had bought this product and spent that kind of $$ months ago on a promise of a soon to be released VC and got this news! incredible!

[MudMarine]

Low sales.....what did they expect with an aircraft without a VC? I feel for the people that paid for it!

[Skittles]

Unless they're sub-letting all of their work I don't understand how they can be in trouble. All it takes for someone to model a good VC is some time spent sat at a computer. Piglet manages to do it at an alarming rate with no income from it, so no excuses.

[centuryseries]

All it takes for someone to model a good VC is some time spent sat at a computer. Piglet manages to do it at an alarming rate with no income from it, so no excuses.

If only it was that simple!!

You may want to remember (not knocking freeware) that if anything in the VC is wrong on a payware aircraft then there is outcry! But anything wrong or missing on a freeware aircraft - it doesn't matter because it didn't cost you anything!

From experience the modelling of a "good" VC alone takes much longer than the external model. Then you have the high tech gauges which a lot of modellers either use off the shelf, or have new made through contracting out the work - like a real aircraft!!

I doubt it is the modelling that is the delay but more the complicated custom built gauges.

It's amazing to think that AS get slated for not being open, and now you're slating them for being open! :icon_lol:

Don't you love this hobby of ours! :mixedsmi:

[falcon409]

. . . . .All it takes for someone to model a good VC is some time spent at a computer. . . .
I know what you're point is there skittles, but in all fairness, it's not as simplistic as it sounds. We don't have any idea what they had planned for the VC in the way of animations, coding and detail. There is a lot more to it than just sitting at a computer and knocking one out.

That being said, your mention of the fact that they may be subletting the project and thus the reason for the delays has merit. After all, how do you go into a meeting in the early stages and say. . .ok, we've got this fantastic external model of the C-17 and once we get the highly detailed VC completed, then we can make that available, but for now, since we need money to support the huge amount of work still left to do, let's offer the exterior model for the full price and with the promise that once the VC is complete they can get it from us as a download. . .what'ya think". . . .Yea, they'll go for that big time. . . .lol. . .really?:173go1:

A line that kinda get's lost in the reading. . . ."as we attempt to complete this project while we still can". . . . . .hmmmmm, while we still can?

[michael davies]

Gotta confess if I ever get back in the 'loop' I'm going the seriously limit my projects to aircraft that use common gauges as much as possible, model them in 3D and then stack them on the shelf ready for each project, ensure that all textures and parts are easily seperated from the project, much like we used to do with CFS weapons.

Essentially all you do is grab the gauge and insert into the model, then make sure the texture is in the folder and compile, sure it makes for a boring line up of projects (unless you are clever with your genre of choice), but as far as gauge coding goes, easy peasy.

I still feel 3D gauges are only required for the really important high movement gauges, useless and poly hungry for things like battery voltage and even fuel level, nice to look at if you zoom in close but as part of a simulation, utterly wasteful in manpower, polys and coding. From normal viewing angles you'd probably be hard pressed to tell the difference between a 3D fuel gauge or high rez textured XML, the bexel being the biggest give away but even for XML that can still be modeled.

Dont pity the C-17 gauge programmer at all, no sir-ree. I've seen the C-17 VC a long time ago, if XML gauges were acceptable and a set up similar to the CH-53 acceptable then the VC would have been finished ages ago, sadly the masses demand now that VCs have to be all singing dancing 3D and that killed that VC stone dead in its tracks and basically required a complete overhaul or rebuild in many cases, a decision to go up market with more systems also added to the time line. The up market idea is a grand idea for things like the Islander or smaller aircraft, but I feel for the C-17 they should have opted for the tried and tested Alphasim product and shipped as it was back in 2008-9, then moved on and used the man power for other projects.

[Skittles]

I know what you're point is there skittles, but in all fairness, it's not as simplistic as it sounds. We don't have any idea what they had planned for the VC in the way of animations, coding and detail. There is a lot more to it than just sitting at a computer and knocking one out.

I respectfully disagree! In my opinion it is all about sitting at the computer and knocking it out! Of course as you mentioned the exception is when a part of the project is sublet, for example I know that Milviz did the cockpit modelling for the Iris Vulcan. Here there is a cost involved and if times are tight then perhaps such a huge delay is unavoidable and unpredictable.

But for a (once) prolific payware developer like Alphasim, surely this problem can be remedied by one man/a small team sitting down at a computer and modelling/coding the thing! All of the external work is already done. It might not be simple but is this not what we pay for? Modelling and coding?

If companies want to take their time with their projects, that's fine, but don't release half of it, promising the other half only to release it months and months down the line.

This is why I completely disagree with the whole concept of releasing external models and VC's separately.

1) You are not guaranteed to get anything (i.e. CaptainSim Buff, before Milviz stepped in).
2) The company might be in trouble (why release an external model only otherwise).
2) You can be charged anything. If Milviz turned around and said 'the Buff VC will cost $100,' what would anyone do? They are not going to do this however, and have laready said the price will be very reasonable.

It's not like the alphasim C-17 external model was cheap. The thing is $60!

[Roger]

Well I've personally had good service from Phil and crew over the years and a few years ago he allowed me to donate a model to an impoverished simmer with disabilities and that is rare today!

I think Alphasim knew that the move to higher levels of 3d pits was the way to go but had problems financing the project, not believing that customers would have to wait so long.

Personally I'm inclined to buy that Albatross for FsX that I've been putting off for so long...and where's the Islander...I'd buy that too if it were available.

[Roger]

Downloading Albatross now:jump:

[centuryseries]

Well I've personally had good service from Phil and crew over the years and a few years ago he allowed me to donate a model to an impoverished simmer with disabilities and that is rare today!

I think Alphasim knew that the move to higher levels of 3d pits was the way to go but had problems financing the project, not believing that customers would have to wait so long.

Personally I'm inclined to buy that Albatross for FsX that I've been putting off for so long...and where's the Islander...I'd buy that too if it were available.

Hi Roger,

Take a look at www.alphasim.co.uk (http://www.alphasim.co.uk) news page - Islander is due for release shortly.

Skittles, don't you think that if they could've they would've released it sooner? You're making it sound like all the delays were intentional!!

You hit one nail on the head - well sort of - you said that AlphaSim were prolific in the past, don't forget that while you know about the Islander and C-17, there are plenty more projects being built in the background. It would be foolish if they just concentrated on one aircraft for a year.

I still firmly have no doubt the VC will be finished.

[rsgunner]

There are a number of repaints available for the Albatross.

Russ

[Roger]

There are a number of repaints available for the Albatross.

Russ

Did you do some Russ and if so where can I download them?

Roger.

[rsgunner]

I did quite a few. Search Flightsim.com for Russel R. Smith

They were uploaded to AVSIM but I don't know if they survived the hack.

Russ

[Roger]

I did quite a few. Search Flightsim.com for Russel R. Smith

They were uploaded to AVSIM but I don't know if they survived the hack.

Russ

Cheers Russ:ernae:

[Roger]

Should have got this ages ago!:ernae:
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y203/rogera/alpha-alb1.jpg

[DX-FMJ]

Milviz, maybe do a VC for this like with the B-52? :salute:

[Roger]

Milviz, maybe do a VC for this like with the B-52? :salute:

...and why would milviz do a vc for an aircraft when Alphasim say the vc for the C17 will be ready by the end of May?

[Prowler1111]

Low sales.....what did they expect with an aircraft without a VC? I feel for the people that paid for it!

..and let me add, cost usd 60 bucks a pop!..

Ok, besides been a developer, i´m also a consumer, and i do love payware aircraft and is a way to support my fellow colleagues....BUT..
What did you guys expected? 60 usd dollars is a HUGE investment in this hobby, Captain Sim released an awesome B-52 (and as far as i have compared, superior to the As C-17 but to be fair i don´t have the AS C-17) for 1/4th the price of that WITH NO PROMISES OF A VC, so what you buy is what you get and if they DO GET TO WORK ON A VC, you can´t bet it will be as least twice the current asking price.
But at 60.00 usd, you don´t make promises, you deliver or simply don´t.You don´t buy a mercedez bens just because you like the looks, you want what mercedes puts under that hood, ´cause that´what makes a Benz..a Benz..or you´ll buy a Korean knock off at half the price.I as a consumer don´t give a rat a** about your finances, i payed (Hypothetical, i don´t have the C-17)60 bucks for an exterior model and a "promise" that in x month or day i´ll get it complete.I did my part (forked the 60 bucks) you didn´t, i would ask my money back.
This absolutely has NOTHING to do with AS products quality, they have an established name in the hooby, it has to do with BAD biz decisions and even WORSE product pricing.
I always refrain to post on ALphasim threads, i HATE alphasim bashing threads. but this time i felt it was necessary to post what i feel.

..Now those that feel like doing so can start a RAZBAM bashing thread..

Best regards

Prowler

[tigisfat]

...and why would milviz do a vc for an aircraft when Alphasim say the vc for the C17 will be ready by the end of May?


no sir,

This is the question: Why would anyone expect a VC from Alphasim?


It's bull to say that poor sales of the C-17 are causing a delay of the VC. I can lay it out right now: the delay of the VC caused poor sales. It's a little unfair to say that the VC isn't done because more people didn't buy the product, and it's indicative of horrible business decision-making.


I'll bet milviz could start from scratch and have it done sooner, without a wake of angry ex-workers to boot. Anyone can get Kolin on email, PM or the phone, I'm not sure that Phil and I have ever had direct contact.


All this, and I'm still a fan of Alphasim. How does that work? Oh yeah, because for all their flaws, they really know what people want and they release it. Most of my payware is Alphasim.

Believe it or not, I think this is going to be a very good year for Alphasim.

[centuryseries]

People paid for the model knowing the VC was not included.

That is their choice. You cannot blame AS for your poor buying decisions (if you felt that strongly about it).

No where has Alphasim ever said the VC will not be finished.

With regard to CS and Milviz, remember one thing - CS never had any intention of releasing a VC for there model hence the low asking price. If they had intended to release a VC they would've raied the price and offered the VC cheaper or free to existing customers.

Enough of the bashing, lets just look forward to seeing more recent pictures of it than this one I found after a quick google...

2191

[krazycolin]

If I may interject before we get back OT.... We only decided to do the VC for the BUFF as CS weren't going to do one. AS "is" doing the VC for the C-17 so we're not willing to tread on any toes there. As well, we would be hard pressed to convince anyone to spend yet another 20 to 30 bucks after having already paid 60. With the BUFF it's a lot more cost intelligent.

However, that said, if Iris doesn't get moving on their CJ-27, we have a big interest in doing that one. The clock is ticking.

kc

[Skittles]

People paid for the model knowing the VC was not included.

That is their choice. You cannot blame AS for your poor buying decisions (if you felt that strongly about it).

People bought the model after being told that the VC would be delivered shortly.

[tigisfat]

However, that said, if Iris doesn't get moving on their CJ-27, we have a big interest in doing that one. The clock is ticking.

kcHAHA!!:icon_lol:

[Roadburner440]

I see Colin already got to this before me. As he said when Captain Sim stated they had no intentions of doing a VC that is why we jumped on it. AS has said for awhile they were doing a VC, systems, and such. It is never good to step on otehr peoples toes in that department. I do hope that their VC/systems turn out well. Is what my $$ are holding out for.

[tigisfat]

I want this C-17 pretty bad too, but I'm glad I've waited for the VC. I'd be pissed if I bought it without.

[ryanbatc]

The VC work has repeatedly stalled due to lack of finance. General low sales and a poor return on the C-17 version 1.0 has left funds gravely depleted.

Does this surprise anyone? It shouldn't.

I hope they learn better next time..... :blind: It pays to release a full product

[Shane Olguin]

Well guys...

I'm not even going to attempt to defuse some of the angrier posters in the thread, but I will throw you all a little bone, as a primer for what's to come with our C-17.

Here it goes:

When the C-17 was released the performance document I created didn't quite make the package. If anyone wants a powerpoint spreadsheet that gives you stab trim settings, takeoff and landing speeds, and other tidbits, email me or send me a PM with your email address. I will send you a powerpoint sheet with all the info you'll need to takeoff and land correctly.

The performance information was derived from the -1 with a plus/minus of a few knots here and there since it's a controlled item. For those of you that don't know me, I'm in the Air Force and I am a hydraulic technician on KC-135Rs and C-17As.

[oldhand]

For those of you that don't know me, I'm in the Air Force and I am a hydraulic technician on KC-135Rs and C-17As.

:jump: Wow! Are we impressed. I'm a multi-point exhaust systems technician for the council. I clean the public toilets. Bet you're impressed with that eh? :salute:

[peter12213]

The world wouldn't work without people like you oldhand and who cares what we do we've all got a bond on here because of our hobby, its not about what you do it how you do it I always say!

[N2056]

:jump: Wow! Are we impressed. I'm a multi-point exhaust systems technician for the council. I clean the public toilets. Bet you're impressed with that eh? :salute:

Seems okay to me for Shane to explain that he actually works on the plane that he is involved with modeling...What's wrong with that? I don't think ridiculing a member is a great way for a new guy to get known here ;)

[tigisfat]

Seems okay to me for Shane to explain that he actually works on the plane that he is involved with modeling...What's wrong with that? I don't think ridiculing a member is a great way for a new guy to get known here ;)

And that's why I know no less than three pilots and a handful of maintainers that can lend a but of truth every now and then run out of here. Very few pilots or maintainers think they're better than everyone, but it's frustrating when people ASSUME they think they're better.


I think Shane just wanted everyone to know that there's a C-17 troop snooping around the AS C-17 project. That lends legitimacy to me.

[Gibbage]

I think its outstanding to have someone who worked on the real aircraft to be a member of the dev team! Its something a lot of us try, but sometimes its hard to find willing people. I know when I did the Sky Unlimited P-38, we had the honor of having a WWII vet on the team that worked with us on getting everything right! He beta tested the aircraft for us, and gave it his approval before it went on sale. There insight in invaluable. Without them, the only thing we know most of the time is what we see in photo's or read in notes. That wont tell you about the little things, the things that turn a good product into a GREAT product. Shane is just proud to be part of it, and I see no problem. I also know that its hard to see something you worked on take slag the way that the C-17 and B-52 did.

[strykerpsg]

And that's why I know no less than three pilots and a handful of maintainers that can lend a but of truth every now and then run out of here. Very few pilots or maintainers think they're better than everyone, but it's frustrating when people ASSUME they think they're better.


I think Shane just wanted everyone to know that there's a C-17 troop snooping around the AS C-17 project. That lends legitimacy to me.

Shane, have seen your input on the Virtualavia forum and appreciate you keeping the interest in a product released under a bad plan. Also, thank you for your service to your country and being mature enough to accept criticism from less mature posters in the forum. It is nice to see people offering their assistance in making a good product better with personal insight via physical hands on. Just be careful of some of the input you offer from the -1. It need not be verbatim quotes, just close enough for government work! Wouldn't want you to jeopardize your career with the Air Force based on complete accuracy in flight envelopes and details.

Also, adopt a thick skin when offering your personal insight. I was helping Battlefront with their CMSF release and got into many attacks for my insight.

Matt

[centuryseries]

Who is oldhand? You say you're an ex-AS dev - I'm interested to find out why you want to ridicule a current team member?

[Shane Olguin]

Seems okay to me for Shane to explain that he actually works on the plane that he is involved with modeling...What's wrong with that? I don't think ridiculing a member is a great way for a new guy to get known here ;)

It was only my intention to bring to light that I work on the aircraft that I helped create for AlphaSim. As someone else said, I hope it would lend a little legitimacy to our project. Besides, being in the military is just an occupation. I actually thank taxpayers as much as people thank me because if it weren't for you all I wouldn't have a pay check! ;-)

[N2056]

Shane, I hope you don't think I was referring to you in my reply about bashing...I posted that in your defense :salute:

[tigisfat]

edit: duplicate

[Odie]

It was only my intention to bring to light that I work on the aircraft that I helped create for AlphaSim. As someone else said, I hope it would lend a little legitimacy to our project. Besides, being in the military is just an occupation. I actually thank taxpayers as much as people thank me because if it weren't for you all I wouldn't have a pay check! ;-)


Shane, thanks for your virtual world service and more importantly, your real world service ! You guys keep the rest of us free to do what we do! :medals:

For me, having expertise behind the project gets this armchair pilot a little closer to the experience.