Hi captain sim,
Just wanted to know if you would consider developing a 777?
It seems to me that its in popular demand due to publishers in the past not creating it correctly.. mentioning no names 
a reply would be great
Thanks alot
Alex

It would be nice to see a 777 in the market with the same quality as the CS fleet. Im not to bothered on the time of release, Its "IF" they will want to make the jump from the 767? Or will they start a 787 project. I just seem to think there is a gap in the market for a good 777 on FSX. Thanks for the feedback Cthulhus.

Space shuttle wrote on Jul 24^th, 2009 at 1:02am:


When Avsim is back online, there is a really good package on there that turns the 737NG from a certain developer into several BBJ variants.

Thomson 757 Pilot wrote on Jul 12^th, 2009 at 4:31pm:


CS Staff,

I too would very much favor a B777; after your current B767 (which I will be buying when you complete everything � ) and, ofcourse, your B-52.

Thank you very much! �

PS: If you are able to make an F-22 or F-15 that would also be much appreciated. �

Well, in the interest of equal time for the opposing viewpoint, I'll chirp up to say my Ariane 737 X2 for FSX is one of my favorite airplanes and has a whole lot going for it, not the least of which it rolls through FSX on oiled ball bearings, so frame rates are a non-issue.  It is pricey and you do have to pay for liveries, although they have a decent single package with a world-wide sampling.

Ariane is one of those companies people love to hate, which I admit to feeling some sympathy for.  They have done more than their share to bring it on themselves in the past.  Based on my experience with their X2 for FSX, I'd have to say they are doing a good job, now.  But when you do buy repaints you are getting interior changes, too, as well as appropriate thrust ratings, i.e. you are buying specific airplanes, not just skins.  Not to mention the repains are by McPhat, which is nice.

But, like I said, it is pricey and you do have to pay for repaints.  And that, by the way, is probably the wave of the future for those who want the very best in specularity and bump maps, the sort of thing that is beyond the abilities of most of us.  If you can build a kit and push up toward 300 pixels per meter and spend the time bumping every rivet, chip and ripple, then you are indeed technically expert and talented.  Of course, there will always be talented people who will work with the stock kit, as we've already seen with the 767.  (And how!)  Without a team working on a UHDT project, though, you are going to have months and months of work ahead of you.  Now, if I had the ability to do that, I would probably consider that time well spent, but I don't.

Personally, I'm willing to pay for liveries, especially if they are to McPhat standards as exhibited in the new AAL for the Super 80.  Given a choice between flying a very nice standard livery and a 280 pixel per meter show pony that cost me a few bucks, I'm probably going to go with the latter to get the most out of my limited hobby time, at least for a few favorites.

It would not be smart for CS to do a 787. That's all I an say. It's pretty much impossible to make an aircraft that's accessible. We don't even know how the 787 systems work, or how the interior sounds like. All we have is that one taxi test, and some pictures. No one's ever even seen it's flight deck!

The 777 on the other hand would be great!

-Matt