Maybe they sould focus on adding the other variants before moving on to the next aircraft, since it's """easier"""? Just like I said, the 787-10 released 2.5 years ago and we still don't have any news about a 787-9
If they aren't going to add the shorter variant, why do we even have the largest variant in the first place?
What would you rather have them do adding the same aircraft but just the shorter version or add new aircrafts first and then later add shorter versions
What would you rather have them do adding the same aircraft but just the shorter version or add new aircrafts first and then later add shorter versions
"Maybe they sould focus on adding the other variants before moving on to the next aircraft, since it's """easier"""? Just like I said, the 787-10 released 2.5 years ago and we still don't have any news about a 787-9"
If they are never going to add the shorter variant, then why add the larger one in the first place
I'm curious, has IPACS promised anyone to add a shorter model within a specified number of years? Do you think adding a brief model is correct? I think launching a new aircraft is the right thing because there are still 220330340 that have not been manufactured yet. I have observed too many replies, and it feels like a debate here. I believe that since it is impossible for two different opinions to reach mutual understanding, we should not pretend to understand each other. That is why I sent a thread shutdown message. Sooner or later, there will be such a day
Just as some sort of anticipation. Took this at EDDM.
I'm curious, has IPACS promised anyone to add a shorter model within a specified number of years?
That's why adding the larger variant first doesn't make sense lol
We could've gotten a -800 instead of the -900, but nah, let's make the larger less popular one and never specify when or if we're ever going to add the more popular variant
This is most probably also going to happen with the A350, unfortunately
That's why adding the larger variant first doesn't make sense lol
We could've gotten a -800 instead of the -900, but nah, let's make the larger less popular one and never specify when or if we're ever going to add the more popular variant
This is most probably also going to happen with the A350, unfortunately
I think launching the -900 first is meaningless. I just like the A350 with 14 wheels. Do you think 1000 is not popular? I think it is popular. Both groups have different opinions, and there are sufficient reasons. So, is convincing the other party meaningful
A350-900 has waaaaay more operators, the -1000 only has like 5 operators, that really limits the number of flights we could do
The problem is that we never really got a shortened variant, like the 787-10 which is already 2.5 years old and the 777-300ER 4.5 years old
We are living in a world where people don't have patience and understand the Dev's team are small not like msfs or x plane having big people to work on. Things take time to come.
If they add a350-1000 what wrong in that? It's ok even if they can add a350-900. To my observation I don't see anything special in a350-900. Just a improved cabin pressure and its a base model of the a350 family.
So far, ipacs adds aircrafts based on the "speciality" for each variant of each place (that's another thing I've observed when they add aircrafts)
For example: the 737-900er has better fuel efficiency and rang compared to its common 737-8NG (ikr you would ask me why max 10 isn't added because, it's not present in the real world where, ipacs can get data of the aircraft).
Boeing 787-10 has a speciality in it's utilisation of economics. It can handle more passengers in cheaper cost for medium haul routes.can I say it? (Cheaper 77w?)
A380- we all know what it's special for. The largest and the biggest passenger aircraft.
So, again it's their choice in this. From what I observed they go based on speciality. It's not only airlines. I can say the a321ceo isn't as popular as a321neo. How come they added that aircraft? It's because, it's again like 737NG can take more extra passengers as well, the introduction of IAE engines for the a320 family. There's a reason for what they develop each variant. It's not because of less airlines or more airlines. Again try to understand that, the team is small they work for us taking their time, sometimes sacrificing some time need to be spend for their well-being, family. Let's be grateful for what we get from ipacs. We need to appreciate them wether it's a350-1000 and a350-900 instead, of arguing that. "I want this airlines" "I want that aircraft variant". Leave the rest to them. They know what to do.
I give you a suggestion: find out that which variant is coming for a350 when they leak out the "landing gear previews".
With this I'll stop talking I know here people are going to insult me and make me go out of the community. My final reply makes you all understand. Peace!
Display MoreWe are living in a world where people don't have patience and understand the Dev's team are small not like msfs or x plane having big people to work on. Things take time to come.
If they add a350-1000 what wrong in that? It's ok even if they can add a350-900. To my observation I don't see anything special in a350-900. Just a improved cabin pressure and its a base model of the a350 family.
So far, ipacs adds aircrafts based on the "speciality" for each variant of each place (that's another thing I've observed when they add aircrafts)
For example: the 737-900er has better fuel efficiency and rang compared to its common 737-8NG (ikr you would ask me why max 10 isn't added because, it's not present in the real world where, ipacs can get data of the aircraft).
Boeing 787-10 has a speciality in it's utilisation of economics. It can handle more passengers in cheaper cost for medium haul routes.can I say it? (Cheaper 77w?)
A380- we all know what it's special for. The largest and the biggest passenger aircraft.
So, again it's their choice in this. From what I observed they go based on speciality. It's not only airlines. I can say the a321ceo isn't as popular as a321neo. How come they added that aircraft? It's because, it's again like 737NG can take more extra passengers as well, the introduction of IAE engines for the a320 family. There's a reason for what they develop each variant. It's not because of less airlines or more airlines. Again try to understand that, the team is small they work for us taking their time, sometimes sacrificing some time need to be spend for their well-being, family. Let's be grateful for what we get from ipacs. We need to appreciate them wether it's a350-1000 and a350-900 instead, of arguing that. "I want this airlines" "I want that aircraft variant". Leave the rest to them. They know what to do.
I give you a suggestion: find out that which variant is coming for a350 when they leak out the "landing gear previews".
With this I'll stop talking I know here people are going to insult me and make me go out of the community. My final reply makes you all understand. Peace!
I’m confused. You’re saying the developers chose longer aircraft because... they can carry more people?
I doubt that. The developers have been clear in the past that they intentionally choose longer aircraft so that it’s “easier” to shrink to shorter variants, if that ever happens.
But yes I agree that there’s no MAX 10 because there’s no real data and no real operators yet.
I think launching the -900 first is meaningless. I just like the A350 with 14 wheels. Do you think 1000 is not popular? I think it is popular. Both groups have different opinions, and there are sufficient reasons. So, is convincing the other party meaningful
The -900 certainly is more popular, and would benefit the simulator more
more liveries = more variety for flights
What are you talking about lol, the reason that the devs add the largest variant is because they say it's going to be easier to scale it down to the shorter variant (although they never did that)
About the A380, it only has one variant, this isn't an example for the discussion
Nobody cares if the plane carries more or less passengers than the other, of if it's more fuel efficient or anything. This is about liveries, having more variety for flights, like, wouldn't you agree that having the 737-800 (THE most popular Boeing jet) on the simulator would greatly expand the available routes around the world? Adding the plane with the most liveries would be the option that best pleases the community
We are living in a world where people don't have patience and understand the Dev's team are small not like msfs or x plane having big people to work on. Things take time to come.
And it really isn't about patience you know
I just don't want to wait multiple years for the devs to finally decide they are going to add the more popular variant (if ever)
The 787-10 is making it's way to be 3 years old and we still don't have any news about a 787-9, the devs just moved to the next aircraft and forgot about it. The whole excuse that they were adding the largest variant it's because it would take LESS time
(and that probably is going to happen with the A350 too)
Even with a few little teasers, we still couldn't avoid war 😂
Alright let's stop debating on useless things and let's just be excited that we're getting the a350 im looking forward to new teasers
Alright let's stop debating on useless things and let's just be excited that we're getting the a350 im looking forward to new teasers
Actually, these useless debates are very entertaining in my opinion
The -900 certainly is more popular, and would benefit the simulator more
more liveries = more variety for flights
Useful to you, useless to me
please paint the windshield with darker color
Jet-Pack (IPACS) When will there be more a350 image teasers?
I've now created a new closed thread with just the teaser images and pinned it to the top.
I'll keep the thread here open for discussions and speculations.
Here is another teaser for you
Unfortunately I can't a220 my way out of this now 😢
