Airbus A310

AndersCN wrote on Feb 9^th, 2014 at 4:48pm:


I think it's because of complexity. Coding all the flight augmentation and flight envelope protection stuff, and all the other computerized systems of a modern Airbus, is hard work.

But an A300 or A310 would be different though. They were not as much computerized as an A330, A340, A380 or the A320 family. The original design of the A300 cockpit still had a flight engineer station.

I personally love the design of the A300 and A310, exterior but especially the cockpit design. I would only fly A300s/A310s, but no other Airbus. Otherwise I'll always stick with Boeing. I just couldn't live without control columns & wheels

I think an A300 or A310 in the Pro Line Captain Sim style would be awesome.

Modern version of A300 and of course the A310 would be nice, though I would still love to see the classic 747.

ibizaFR wrote on Feb 23^rd, 2014 at 4:49pm:

I had many great flight to/from Australia and the Philippines in the DC-10, so it would be great to have it done by Captain Sim, but only after they did a 747-100/200/SP!

Sorry, but I had to include my preference for the 747 being done by Captain Sim.

Realistically, if CS made a 747 package (100,200,200 Freighter and perhaps the SP) Then I think it would really be their best sell BUT ONLY if the systems can beat the old Ready For Pushback 747 for FS9. Simmers regard the RFP747 as a VERY good aircraft and CS can't match or beat that aircraft in systems modeling then it won't really go over well with potential buyers.

The performance and handling of each model has to be different and accurate along with more options to customize your 747 with different equipment used by different airlines. For example, back in the late 80s early 90s, BA used FMS on their 747-200s. So perhaps an option for having INS only, INS and GPS (those small bendix models were used quite a bit along with the INS) and an FMS version.

TCAS should also be included as an option along with the option to have EFIS displays as seen in this photo.
http://images2.jetphotos.net/img/2/1/2/8/65373_1207330821.jpg

In the end, with all of these features, the high price tag won't be in question. The bottomline is that people pay for quality and options. This was quite evident when certain 737 made one developer very wealthy..

IMO CS would be better off sticking to classic steam gauge aircraft because CS is extremely poor at system programming for modern EFIS aircraft, as proven by the 777 & the 757. They're going to stumble hard if they try and do a FBW Airbus.

Classic "Steam gauge" aircraft:

1) 747 Classic (CLS version is awful, RFP cannot run on FSX)
2) DC-10
3) DC-8
4) Convair 880/990
5) BAC 1-11
6) Fokker 28 (Jet)
7) Fokker 27 (Prop)

Modern aircraft:

1) Saab 340 (mostly steam gauges)
2) Dash 8-100/200 (Preempt **** again maybe?)
3) Sukhoi Superjet (I think CS understands Russian)

More:
1) Dornier 228
2) Dornier 328/JET
3) Xian MA60
4) Hawker Siddeley 748
5) Embraer EMB-110 Bandit


All other aircraft I can think of are already being developed by others.

I'll add my name to the VC10 wish list. We definitely need a new "Queen of the Skies" for the FSX.

Loving the 707 btw.

Cheers,
Marcus.

No B707 can exist without its major competitor DC8-63