Constellation

blanston12 · Post by **blanston12** » 29 May 2006, 16:06

The FSDZigns is great but of course does not have a VC. Don't expect any updates soon as one of the principles has had some very serious health issues.

Abacus has a payware connie that is pretty good, and you can try it free for a week to evaluate it. I thought it was good but my normal resistance to payware caused me to delete it before the week was up.

ianhind · Post by **ianhind** » 29 May 2006, 16:36

Garry,

You are probably right - just one captured on camera in BOAC colours.

And the CL-44 was from Seaboard as well

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1006542/M/

Ian

Chris Trott · Post by **Chris Trott** » 29 May 2006, 17:09

blanston12 wrote:The FSDZigns is great but of course does not have a VC. Don't expect any updates soon as one of the principles has had some very serious health issues.

Okay, not to sound rude here, but everything you mentioned about FSDZigns has been said already and some important information was left out of your statement that was in the previous one. This was all said back on page one too, so it's known what the status of that project is.

Not only VC, they're planning all versions up through the L-1649s (the ones that had turboprops on them for the Navy). Unfortunately, John (the designer) had several medical issues recently and they are being slowed down while all work he's done is transferred to a new designer who has stepped up to continue the work John started.

Post by **Garry Russell** » 29 May 2006, 17:29

I realised that Chris

But I was not rude enough to point it out

Doesn't really matter

Not important enough to be the big "I AM" over it

Anycase you have only repeated your mistake about the 1649 being a turboprop.

Garry

airboatr · Post by **airboatr** » 30 May 2006, 01:27

Hello GArry
I looked extensivly but I couldn't find anything with BOAC
other than what you turned back up
But I did find a few interesting articals about the Loughead
Brothers
changed their names to avoid mispronunciation
http://www.pilotfriend.com/acft_manu/Lo ... Martin.htm
and some others
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eyeno/sets ... 062617133/
http://www.luftfahrtmuseum.com/htmi/itf/c121.htm
a quick connie ride video
http://www.singularselections.com/rmebay/CDSample.wmv
Read down past the Pictures ......................pillar of fire.
The Brave Little Boy
All of the occupants of the DC-8 were killed instantly, except Stephen Baltz, an 11-year old redhead from Wilmette, Illinois, who pla.,...........
http://www.nyc-architecture.com/PS/PS.htm

Post by **Garry Russell** » 30 May 2006, 09:04

Hi Joe

I think it may have been that collision that caused the introduction of the 250 knot limit.

Garry

Chris Trott · Post by **Chris Trott** » 30 May 2006, 16:02

Garry Russell wrote:I realised that Chris

But I was not rude enough to point it out

Doesn't really matter

Not important enough to be the big "I AM" over it

Anycase you have only repeated your mistake about the 1649 being a turboprop.

Garry

Actually Garry, the only reason I re-quoted my original post was that "blanston" made mention that there was not a VC even though it's being included in the new version, and that the issue with John isn't really slowing them down (contrary to what's suggested). As for the 1649 "mistake", being that I simply quoted my original post, it's not a repeat, it's good quoting ethos. I didn't modify what was being quoted just because of an error, I quote it as it appears on the page.

blanston12 · Post by **blanston12** » 30 May 2006, 17:52

Chris Trott wrote: Actually Garry, the only reason I re-quoted my original post was that "blanston" made mention that there was not a VC even though it's being included in the new version, and that the issue with John isn't really slowing them down (contrary to what's suggested).

You'll Rue the day you crossed me Trott!

All kidding aside, I have been following events at the FSDZigns forum on a regular basis, they were all ready to release there VC version and they canceled it because of some problems they could they were having and one of there principle developers had had some serious health issues. Chris I find it hard to believe you disagree with that even when you commented on it on the tread where it was discussed. If another developer has taken over from john there has been no discussion of it on the FSDZign forum. I hope they release it some day but right now if I were looking for a connie with a VC I would wait for it.

http://fsdzigns.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=419

OK so I was out of town and did not read the tread completely before I threw in my two pents, sorry, you did not need to jump all over me for that. :crying:

Chris Trott · Post by **Chris Trott** » 30 May 2006, 23:04

To quote from John's post with the part about the new designer emboldened-

Now, don't let any of this make you think that this project will not continue! I may not be the one to finish it but it will be finished!!!! We are in the process of putting things in place to get everything restarted, full bore, in the next few months. Please have patience and if you have skills that will help please offer them to Kent.

Therapy is working and someday soon I hope to be able to do most of what I did before. We have another, well known, and more experienced aircraft designer to help us finish the task. To be announced soon!!

Also, there is nothing in that thread about the VC version being cancelled, only delayed.

From Kent Morris -

The release of Version 2 has been delayed. We are still working on different pieces of the puzzle but have not been able to put it all together.

We do plan to have a Virtual Cockpit in the next release but this has proven to be a challenge for us. We have very high standards for visual appearance and are not satisfied with what we have at the moment.

I also know from off-forum chats with a couple of the guys involved that work has already restarted in some areas on the models, so it won't be too long before significant movement is seen in the project again.

Vixus · Post by **Vixus** » 31 May 2006, 22:17

Garry Russell wrote:
britishtourer wrote:Hi Airboatr,

I've got that Super Connie and it is indeed very nice, but it's not hugely detailed as it's a Mike Stone model.
Actually BT most of the percieved detail is in the texturing on a model like this, so there are probably nice paints out there that will make it look a whole lot better.

It's all down to wether or not the base paintkit was used I suppose.

Just a thought

Garry

The Breguet Super Connie is as detailed as you can get, with excellent panels. Standalone as supergb.zip on flightsim, if anyone's interested.