Asobo partnering with Orbx on Fokker F.VII Trimotor

[ak416]

Just announced on today's developer Q & A stream, part of the Living Legends aircraft series. Will be released along side World Update 7, Australia. This one will include a manual!

[YoYo]

Just announced on today's developer Q & A stream, part of the Living Legends aircraft series. Will be released along side World Update 7, Australia. This one will include a manual!

With ORBX?

[jankees]

I found the Ju a disappointment, so I have no high hopes for this one..

[YoYo]

It will be this:

https://acesflyinghigh.wordpress.com/2018/12/08/the-record-breaking-southern-cross-and-kingsford-smith-memorial/

Fokker F.VIIb/3m trimotor / Charles Kingsford Smith

[DennyA]

So apparently all of the Legends aircraft are going to be trimotors.

Will the USA get the Ford Trimotor, Lockheed L1011, 727, or XB-51?

[blanston12]

I am sure they won't be all trimotors, I expect the next three will be the Fiat G.12, Sud Caravelle, AN-2.

[azflyboy]

Unless they commit to actually fixing some bugs after release (which never happened with the JU-52 as far as I know), adding a manual to the airplane doesn't do a whole lot of good.

Apparently there's been licensing issues with the AN-2, so it's not clear when it'll be out.

[Twice43]

Apparently the Fokker release is tied in with World Update VII, (January 25, 2022), which will feature Australia.
Again, no love is shown to the DC-3
T43

[YoYo]

[YoYo]

I must admit that its a bit quiet about this model, no video, no any screenshots preview etc. Could it be worse than with the Ju-52?

[Bomber_12th]

The real life replica in Australia is getting really close to being completed and returning to flight soon, having been under restoration since 2010 after having sustained damage in an emergency landing in South Africa back in 2002. https://australianaviation.com.au/20...lsqCPlrzR6KXEQ

[ColoKent]

Could it be worse than with the Ju-52?

If Asobo is involved, the answer is an unreserved "yes"...wish they would stick to improving the SDK so that developers can produce better aircraft. They haven't excelled thus far as add-on specialists...

Kent

[ak416]

There was a trailer, screenshots and a chat with the developer (Orbx) during the most recent Q&A


https://youtu.be/jX6ftFBU0Q4?t=472

wish they would stick to improving the SDK so that developers can produce better aircraft.

They have been. Every week an update is posted at https://www.flightsimulator.com/ that details development of the SDK.

[YoYo]

Pretty cool, in this short video. I have a soft spot for old birds like this, but this time I'll hold back and wait for feedback.

[LostPilot]

If Asobo is involved, the answer is an unreserved "yes"...wish they would stick to improving the SDK so that developers can produce better aircraft. They haven't excelled thus far as add-on specialists...

I doubt the folks working on this are the same people working on the SDK. The SDK has also been receiving regular updates including a very sizeable improvement to flight modeling coming soon.

[ColoKent]

My point in my post above was never that Asobo working on add-ons was delaying the SDK. I was trying to be somewhat politically correct, but I've never really been too good at that, so let me be blunt: To date, IN MY OPINION ONLY, any add-on Asobo has had anything to do with thus far has been....ummmm....how should I put this....kind of like the default airplanes in MSFS...in other words, underwhelming and not living up to their potential for simmers vs. game players. And yes, I know they are collaborating with known developers....but I'm still not thrilled with the few I've bought. I'd rather see them spend time on perfecting the platform vs. coming up with add-ons that we can only get through the MS Marketplace (which is also a complete piece of-- eh excuse me, I meant to say "is less than optimum").

That said, I'm in MSFS to stay. Love the visuals.

Okay gang, back to your regularly scheduled non-curmudgeon programming...!

Kent

[ryanbatc]

Apparently the Fokker release is tied in with World Update VII, (January 25, 2022), which will feature Australia.
Again, no love is shown to the DC-3
T43

Do we really want the DC3 to be a cheap dlc from Microsoft though?

[ColoKent]

Do we really want the DC3 to be a cheap dlc from Microsoft though?

BINGO.

Kent

[Sundog]

Isn't Baz already working on a DC-3?

[dvj]

My point in my post above was never that Asobo working on add-ons was delaying the SDK. I was trying to be somewhat politically correct, but I've never really been too good at that, so let me be blunt: To date, IN MY OPINION ONLY, any add-on Asobo has had anything to do with thus far has been....ummmm....how should I put this....kind of like the default airplanes in MSFS...in other words, underwhelming and not living up to their potential for simmers vs. game players. And yes, I know they are collaborating with known developers....but I'm still not thrilled with the few I've bought. I'd rather see them spend time on perfecting the platform vs. coming up with add-ons that we can only get through the MS Marketplace (which is also a complete piece of-- eh excuse me, I meant to say "is less than optimum").That said, I'm in MSFS to stay. Love the visuals. Okay gang, back to your regularly scheduled non-curmudgeon programming...!Kent

I can generally agree with your opinion on ASOBO aircraft... but some of the recent very expensive payware has been less than stellar. I hope the upcomming DC Designs Concorde will be the gamechanger MSFS needs.

[Twice43]

Isn't Baz already working on a DC-3?

Believe so.
Currently refining the sounds as part of the final work, & someone elsewhere has said AH 'told them' it could be out be the end of March, 2022.
Not sure if they were hallucinating, or have a good source.
T43

[Paul K]

I hope the upcomming DC Designs Concorde will be the gamechanger MSFS needs.

You might have looked into it more deeply than me, but from what I have seen, it's not what I would call a 'game changer'. Nice looking external model, good flightdeck, not 'study' level' ( subjective though that is ). A welcome add-on for Concorde lovers, but a game changer ?

[YoYo]

Its out!

[K5083]

I have been flying it tonight and here is a brief review.

There are five versions in total, the F.VIIa/1m single-engine version, the F.VIIb/3m Southern Cross, the F.VIIb/3m on skis, the F.VIIb/3m on floats, and the F.VIIb/3m "Retrofit" with modern cockpit. All of them have only one skin except for the Retrofit, which comes with 8 skins, a Southern Cross, a "generic" (Southern Cross colors but without lettering on it), four nice vintage airline schemes, and two stupid Aviators Club schemes. The model for the Southern Cross and generic /3ms have the modified angular vertical tail, whereas the others have the more standard comma-shaped tail. Weirdly, they did not provide a standard airliner trimotor version with the vintage cockpit. However, I found that you can swap the cockpits by editing each livery's model.cfg file so that it uses the old cockpit rather than the new one. Hopefully word about this will get around so that repainters are not deterred from doing the many fabulous skins that could be done for the standard airliner.

The modern cockpit is really modern, steam gauge but very up-to-date with a lot more dials and switches. I haven't tested whether they all function, but the overall impression is one of overkill. It's not convincing as a vintage aircraft with its instruments updated by a modern restorer, it's more like how the cockpit would be set up if these aircraft were still in airline service circa 1980 or so. The vintage cockpit is very straightforward, the same one is used for all of the /3ms, and it's functional but I find it odd that there are no manifold pressure gauges. The /1m has a different cockpit which is even simpler but again has no m.p. gauge.

The models and texturing are to a high standard. The sounds are quite nice.

Flight characteristics seem pretty decent. The CG limits on the weight and balance screen are useless, giving no guidance as to the allowable range, but an empty airplane defaults to a CG of about 5% MAC which is definitely out of range. Move the slider so that your CG is at least 25% MAC if you would like to have any ability to flare on landing. The plane feels appropriately heavy and stable apart from the usual MSFS twitchiness on the runway. On landing it shows down and stops nicely. I would say the flight model is better than the Ju 52 that was released with the Germany WU.

The biggest disappointment is the /1m, which is far underpowered and will barely struggle off the ground, even when empty. There's no peeking at the encrypted flight model, but the target_performance.cfg file calls for a max hp of 300, which is wrong. F.VIIa/1ms were engined with anything from 360 to 480 hp, with 450 hp being the most common. So, poor show on Orbx for not properly researching this interesting variant, and they couldn't have flight tested it, either. It was satisfying the first time I coaxed one up to a safe altitude, but it shouldn't have been that difficult. This is the one thing I've found that really cries out for a fix. But given the history of these partnered airplanes, I won't hold my breath waiting for one.

Overall, except for the anemic single engined variant, I'd say it's a nice plane and good value for money.

August

[YoYo]

I have been flying it tonight and here is a brief review.
...

It looks better now than it was last time so thank you for the opinion!