Alphasim Hudson is out !

Post by **Rick Piper** » 11 Jun 2007, 22:27

MickWho

Post by **TSR2** » 11 Jun 2007, 22:44

Michael davies wrote:Trev,

Just call me Mickoo, its fine by me, we have four Michaels in our office at work, MD, MC, MT and Mick ( hes an apprentice, he hasnt earnt the right to have two initials yet LOL )

Best

Michael ( Mickoo )

How do you think we feel with Dave's & Davids

steve p · Post by **steve p** » 11 Jun 2007, 23:03

Mmm, I think that Alphasim should direct some questions at the guy who drew up the plans that they used. Spot the difference between the Alphasim Hudson and the real deal...

The Alphasim version has two horizontal elevators (ala did the Lodestar and Ventura) whereas the Hudson has a single one in the style of a Hampden.

Airfix got it wrong too.

Best wishes
Steve P

Michael davies · Post by **Michael davies** » 11 Jun 2007, 23:13

Is that turret for real !!, l mean it looks like something out of the Crystal Maze, jeez talk about exposed to your enemies fire, mind l dont think aluminium skin stops cannon shells any better than perspex so its a mental state of mind sitting back there, but thats one scary place to be under fire

.

Best

Michael D

snave · Post by **snave** » 12 Jun 2007, 00:14

Well, if there are plans afoot, I won't consign the Hudswine to the Hangar of Death just yet. :huf:

I forgot to mention I have it for FSX, and not FS9. I don't think that will make a difference from the model perspective, but perhaps it might for the FDE.

This could be a very good basis for a range of aircraft, so I hope the bugs can be ironed out. It seems ironic to be asking for it to be made much more difficult to fly, but there you have it!

Vulcan_to_the_Sky! · Post by **Vulcan_to_the_Sky!** » 13 Jun 2007, 09:00

Will have to get this at the soonest opportunity!

AllanL · Post by **AllanL** » 17 Jun 2007, 15:20

While Alphasim have advertantly (or is that inadvertantly?) produced the tailplane for a civil variant, perhaps we could see a solid nose to complete the transformation? And any window configuration changes which those in the know could come up with.

I've seen the comments on the Alphasim forum that prices are only going one way with the additional workload involved in producing FSX compatible products. While I sympathise with the need to recoup the cost of the time involved, I wonder if producers of download military models have got the market and pricing levels right.

I know that I am guilty of downloading a couple of models that came down to about Â£5-7 on the "it's worth a look at that price level" basis, and I probably would not have considered them at their "normal" pricing levels.

I probably fly point to point more in civil models and just ramble round the lumpy scenery in military models. On that basis the civil ones get more use, and the military ones get bought on a whim (and a prayer that SWMBO isn't looking) How many people have bought Captain Sim models during one of their sale periods who would not have at the $35+ level?

So, with Alphasim and PMDG pushing prices up the way, will the effect on sales result in less total income than pricing at the "tempting at a whim" level?

Most Chancellors of the Exchequer make the mistake of pushing tax on spirits up from time to time to levels that reduce total tax income, because the public stop buying whisky.

Now if only Alphasim gave away a bottle of Bruichladdich with every download....... :partyman:

snave · Post by **snave** » 17 Jun 2007, 15:33

They can price it wherever they want, but they cannot afford to make errors such as the ones above if they do. Panels and VC's will need to be far more sophisticated, addon features will be expected as standard - and frankly, their customer support will need ramping up to a whole new level.

I am sure that if they look with more wisdom, they will appreciate that it is their pricing, not their voluminous output or qualitative achievements that is the key to their success. No one insists they develop for FSX. Or that they continue to develop for FS9.

Michael davies · Post by **Michael davies** » 17 Jun 2007, 18:36

Really ?, looks a lot different from where l sit, to not offer a FSx model will result in very few sales at all....irrespective of pricing, sadly FSx is here to stay and so Alphasim has to supply that small ( l would say growing but l remain to be convinced ) customer base with models, maybe some day in the sunny future it will all be bright and rosy with no dual model requirments, until then its a nightmare and right royal pain in the behind.

snave wrote: No one insists they develop for FSX.

Quixoticish · Post by **Quixoticish** » 17 Jun 2007, 18:42

Michael davies wrote:Really ?, looks a lot different from where l sit, to not offer a FSx model will result in very few sales at all....irrespective of pricing, sadly FSx is here to stay and so Alphasim has to supply that small ( l would say growing but l remain to be convinced ) customer base with models, maybe some day in the sunny future it will all be bright and rosy with no dual model requirments, until then its a nightmare and right royal pain in the behind.

snave wrote: No one insists they develop for FSX.

Why not offer the FSX and FS9 products as separate products, and just offer a discounted upgrade scheme for those who purchased the FS9 version when they choose to update to FSX at a later date? If the product is of a high enough quality then I'm sure people will pay for their sim of choice, some are in FSX, some are in FS9, but I highly doubt that those of us dabbling in both represent the majority of users. This system would also allow the two products (the same aircraft, but for different versions of FS) to be released at different times if need be, no delaying the FS9 model while it is brought up to FSX spec and vice-versa.