747 Classic

You gave me hope. Thanks

@Voice-of-Reason Thank you for reply. I mean for the p3d. My pocket is ready.

Ok, thank you for replying. I am sure these things are hugely complicated. I was fascinated to know how it was all done but by the time Robin was on I was so tired from everything 8 didn’t take half as much in as I would have wanted. Was it filmed and recorded by any chance

https://community.justflight.com/topic/246/747-classic-progress/174

This is something that is currently being addressed (the challenge with so many mods!).

We are assessing the development of products for FS2020 but it's currently too early to provide anymore information on that, other than to say that we intend to support it.

@SimeonWilbury Agreed a ‘typical’ RR powered -236 would be appreciated. There were certainly a few oddities in both their 100 and 200 fleets eg G-BMGS was a 200 srs with P&W engines and 3 upper desk windows. The devil is always in the detail!

Yes, they have mentioned some variations will come to the 747! I posted about the FPD a while ago, and they responded that they will be brining in one of the newer style "barrel" FPDs as an option. This will be a good way to make the different variants "feel" different to the simmer. Without these slight variations, there is not much difference between the -100 & -200, for instance. The way I think would be most representative of most fleets and the progression of technology would be as follows: 747-100 Approach Auto-Throttle Basic Dual AP Approach Auto-Throttle FPD No EPRL computer installed (Thrust & EPR Limits set manually according to charts) 747-200 FFRATS FFRATS style "Barrel" FPD (Dual AP 3-column type) FFRATS style EPRL computer 747SP Approach Auto-Throttle Non-FFRATS, Dual AP, style "light cap" FPD Non-FFRATS Style EPRL Computer Style 2. 747-300 Same as -200 if they want to get fancy, they could give the -300 triple autopilot channels, in which case it would have the following: FFRATS FFRATS style "Barrel" FPD (Triple AP 4-column type) FFRATS style EPRL computer This would make each different variant feel unique in the way each is operated.

great news. thank you.

Thanks Rob!

Very nice screen shots, sas looks so cool,

@centurion88 said in About 747sp: Are you considering developing a 747sp expansion in the future? For there haven't been a 747sp payware so far. Yes, planned for a future pack after the initial release.

@ual763 said in Engine variants?: @Jon_OZ How is that not realistic? How do we know this isn’t just for the -200 model? There were a number of -200 operators that did have the -7R4G2, including United. Also, keep in mind it looks like the flight deck was modeled after the JAL/TRANSAERO 747-300 which also had the -7R4G2 in real life. I’m sure their 747-100 with PW will have the -7A or similar. Really all they’d need to do for that is reduce some thrust. But, the -7R4G2 is perfectly fine for the -200, even though the -7J was more popular. Because mosrt -200's - modeled from original release time didnt have the -7R. That was certified until 1980 onwards. I think the -7Q was around 1979. Even many earlier -200's had the -3AW, before upgrading to the -7/ -7AW / -7F. As did the early -100's. But like you said, other varients were used in the early to mid 70's. Seems developers love to model early models, then throw in the most pwoerful, much later released engines for some strange, lazy reasons, Lets hope the -100 does't have the -7R!!

Yeah since the prototype, the advances, throughout the classics life in technology is immense, so yeah totally agree. I would love to see the 70A engines as an option though.

If an FMC were to eventually be added, I would love to see the LTN-92. This was used by a number of 747-200 operators right up to retirement. Yes, it is technically an INS system - But... It is the pre-cursor to the FMSs we all know and love today. With the LTN-92, the operator can type in airports, navaids, and waypoints using their names (not coordinates as in the old CIV-A INSs). This makes it considerably easier to use than the CIV-A, while still maintaining realism to the original aircraft. These units were not aftermarket additions such as some of the modern-era FMSs you see in some cargo 747-200s, they were factory standard options in the late model 747-200s! Considering the autothrottle modeled in the JF 747 Classic is the original Approach Autothrottle and not the FFRATS authrottle, we wouldn’t be able to take full advantage of all the features of a newer 747-400 style FMS anyways. And for those wondering about the old LTN-92 capability in MNPS airspace, the LTN-92 can be supplemented with 2 GPS signals to make it up to RNP-5 capable. This is why I believe the LTN-92 would be the perfect choice for a future “FMS” if JF decides to add one later on. Cheers, Rob [image: D03-AA58-B-23-C7-41-CC-BE39-D5-FEAF0-E9524.jpg]