Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
Collapse
Just Flight Community Forum
  1. Home
  2. Just Flight
  3. MSFS Products
  4. F70 & F100 Professional
  5. Feature question fokker 70/100

Feature question fokker 70/100

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved F70 & F100 Professional
22 Posts 14 Posters 1.0k Views 3 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • MartynM Martyn

    It's taken four years and considerable investment to reach this stage on our first modern-ish airliner. We will continue to develop and improve the aircraft, like we do for all our aircraft, but we have been clear about what the product does and doesn't include at this stage. I think it's important to note that many other airliner developers have been upgrading their airliners for several years by this point.

    If you are encountering an issue with included functionality, such as go arounds, then please report that and we'll address it ASAP.

    We are very happy with the end result of all that work and think it's a product that delivers value for money.

    Regarding failures and wear, it's something that we'd like to include if there is sufficient demand. After what seemed like a lot of requests, it was something that we added to our 146/RJ and PA38, but unfortunately we saw little interest in that.

    SwissairMD11S Offline
    SwissairMD11S Offline
    SwissairMD11
    wrote last edited by
    #12

    @Martyn Thanks for coming back at this thread. Am not sure how many people got the 146, seems like more people awaited the F70/100 due the more modern aircraft as you just mentioned. And I assume (including myself) that the failure system is a deeply appreciated feature amongst all the current products that has it. No response means it doing what it's suppose to do, keeping us busy.

    It would be cool to see a feature within the F70/100 with "MTBF" and a option with wear and tear based from "off" "realistic" "high"

    And yes am 1 of those guys who would pay for a high extensive failure system, how would that look like? Same as TFDI called "XS" Extended Simulation, it's an extra feature which you have to pay for that opens up a list of possibilities.

    Wich is based on how the aircraft is handled, such as slamming the throttles to firewall power to often, to long etc.. Hard landings damage tires, many landings wear them out, overheating them will melt the defuse plug, brakes wear out, oil is being consumed that evenetually lead to engine damage if not maintend and so the list goes on.

    Besides my ramble up here, I again have to state that how it's modeled + the textures are top tier! Like everything else is spot on, the failures system would be a "chefs kiss" to this good looking product!

    1 Reply Last reply
    1
    • RhinozherousR Offline
      RhinozherousR Offline
      Rhinozherous
      wrote last edited by Rhinozherous
      #13

      I came here to ask if there is a failure system planned... For me it is a "no buy" without failures. It feels like a waste of time watching parameters or completing procedures when there is zero chance for anything going wrong. The RJ and 146 are so much more immersive in that regard.

      I also would pay extra for a MTBF system. Why not make it optional?

      1 Reply Last reply
      1
      • G Offline
        G Offline
        gcharrie
        wrote last edited by
        #14

        I'm in line with all what was said. No buy for me if no failure system. Will stay on the RJ which is so great.

        I know that adding that feature is more work, but developing aircraft with so much detailed systems during several years is a waste of time... on the product pages we often have very long list of all what is simulated in detail.... and knowing it won't fail seems a bit useless....
        We can play with the systems to see how it works and react and see how well it's implemented... but we don't do that on every fligh 🙂

        1 Reply Last reply
        2
        • W Offline
          W Offline
          WingC3
          wrote last edited by
          #15

          I'll add my voice to the chorus of those asking for failures; especially pilot-induced ones. An aircraft of such high fidelity should punish you for making serious mistakes. Hot starts, blown tires, etc. Especially on an older aircraft with fewer automated protections against such errors. Also, I see that state saving is intended, based on the EFB options, and one of the great uses of that is maintenance simulation.
          It's a great aircraft, and I'm absolutey enjoying it.

          1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • K Offline
            K Offline
            kityatyi
            wrote last edited by
            #16

            Agreed. A failure system would be amazing.

            1 Reply Last reply
            1
            • S Offline
              S Offline
              Skrelk
              wrote last edited by
              #17

              I have a strict no failures, no buy policy

              RhinozherousR 1 Reply Last reply
              2
              • S Skrelk

                I have a strict no failures, no buy policy

                RhinozherousR Offline
                RhinozherousR Offline
                Rhinozherous
                wrote last edited by
                #18

                @Skrelk said in Feature question fokker 70/100:

                I have a strict no failures, no buy policy

                Yes, I follow the same.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • S Offline
                  S Offline
                  Sleepy
                  wrote last edited by
                  #19

                  If there are no failures then why even simulate it all on such a deep level? I say yes add them. It brings an older aircraft fully to life especially if it's a wear and tear system that reacts to how you handle the aircraft. I would even pay extra for a system like this

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  1
                  • SwissairMD11S Offline
                    SwissairMD11S Offline
                    SwissairMD11
                    wrote last edited by
                    #20

                    I think they will do it. I can't wait to keep focus on it, checking engine vibration, checking oil levels, checking oil pressures etc.. 🙂

                    RhinozherousR 1 Reply Last reply
                    1
                    • SwissairMD11S SwissairMD11

                      I think they will do it. I can't wait to keep focus on it, checking engine vibration, checking oil levels, checking oil pressures etc.. 🙂

                      RhinozherousR Offline
                      RhinozherousR Offline
                      Rhinozherous
                      wrote last edited by
                      #21

                      @SwissairMD11 I am not do sure if they do it. It was already said that they might think about it if there is demand (as it was for the RJ/146).
                      Maybe if we show interest here in the forum (in a respectful and civilzed way)

                      SwissairMD11S 1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      • RhinozherousR Rhinozherous

                        @SwissairMD11 I am not do sure if they do it. It was already said that they might think about it if there is demand (as it was for the RJ/146).
                        Maybe if we show interest here in the forum (in a respectful and civilzed way)

                        SwissairMD11S Offline
                        SwissairMD11S Offline
                        SwissairMD11
                        wrote last edited by
                        #22

                        @Rhinozherous

                        We do need to stay indeed civil and respectfull, these guys worked hard on it, and that must be said! I knew from the get go that I would not fly this plane much without a failure system, but I bought it anyway to show my respect and support to the efforts that has been made by the developers. But because of that it will be a "hangar queen" most of the time.

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        1
                        Reply
                        • Reply as topic
                        Log in to reply
                        • Oldest to Newest
                        • Newest to Oldest
                        • Most Votes


                        • Login

                        • Don't have an account? Register

                        • Login or register to search.
                        • First post
                          Last post
                        0
                        • Categories
                        • Recent
                        • Tags
                        • Popular
                        • Users