|
Post by Mike Monce - HJG on Dec 1, 2008 14:25:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Dec 1, 2008 15:56:21 GMT
Nice to see a good picture of the Dart engine shame we dont see more of these anymore...get fed up of airbuses
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 1, 2008 19:59:55 GMT
We've got 1 of those suckers derelict here at AKL/NZAA .... I always wondered what it was.
Now I know !
The aircraft we have has been here for years after it's owner couldn't/wouldn't pay his fees .... so .... we "IMPOUNDED IT" .... and it's never left since.
Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
bully707
CV-990
Former E-3A Crew
Posts: 44
|
Post by bully707 on Dec 1, 2008 20:18:44 GMT
HI there!
I just wanted to chip in my 2 cents. It does look like a DC-9 to me as well...there hasn't been a freeware one, since FFX/SGA and Erick have stopped working on one.
Or did I miss something?
|
|
|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Dec 1, 2008 20:22:09 GMT
no
|
|
|
Post by gus on Dec 2, 2008 19:56:25 GMT
Hello, Boeing 717-200 End production: 23 May 2006 HJG first delivery ... XX/XX/2009 .... ? Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by Tony Madge - HJG on Dec 5, 2008 10:38:25 GMT
Well it wont be 23 May 2009 it will be a lot sooner
|
|
|
Post by dutchman2 on Dec 9, 2008 20:08:37 GMT
Speaking of the GI, any chance for that to be the next project here after the three-holers are released?
After all, she is still a jet at heart.........
|
|
|
Post by railrunner130 on Dec 10, 2008 23:53:29 GMT
I started a plea thread in the Off Topic Section about getting a G-1.
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on Dec 11, 2008 12:53:48 GMT
Grumman won't allow there aircraft to be made for FS.........some who started the biz jets recieved legal cease and desist notices.
I wonder if it applies to old aircraft like the G1??
Bob .yes the G2,3,4 are quite big
About the size of an f-28 and in the case of the 2 and 4 the basic same engine...RR Spey Junior
Garry
|
|
|
Post by benh on Dec 11, 2008 15:25:25 GMT
Grumman won't allow there aircraft to be made for FS.........some who started the biz jets recieved legal cease and desist notices. Really? Abacus have done a GIII, and Mike Stone and also Peter Lider have already done GV's. Rgds Ben
|
|
|
Post by aerofoto - HJG Admin on Dec 11, 2008 19:02:04 GMT
"IF" .... these FS aircraft are being modeled and marketed by a "PAYWARE" producer .... then I can understand the legal situation completely .... regardless of how much I resent it too.
Boeing .... during the early 1980's .... did something similar to AIRFIX, REVELL, HASEGAWA, and HELLER in respect of their right to mold plastic kitsets of Boeing produced aircraft .... which by implication now also extends to Douglas/McDonnell-Douglas aircraft as well.
In fact Boeing even went as far as having the US Customs seize all imports of Boeing represented products by these kitset manufacturers .... until those manufacturers paid Boeing a hefty license fee (Vendors Contract) for the right to produce and market products (even plastic kitsets) bearing the Boeing name.
I'm surprised this hasn't happened sooner in FS !
By comparison Airbus actually paid AIRFIX, REVELL, HASEGAWA, and HELLER to tool-up and mold kitset representations of their aircraft.
Also by comparison .... the McDonnell-Douglas attitude was "we have no major objections at all so long as the product bears a good likeness of the aircraft we produce".
That's probably what got them in the POOH in the first instance Ben .... and after the fact .... in other words ABACUS producing that aircraft (which I presume is "PAYWARE") is likely what caught Grumman attention and resulted in their response .... with Grumman maybe telling ABACUS something like "We'll close our eyes on this occasion, but, DON'T DO IT AGAIN OR ELSE".
YEAH .... but .... Mike STONE was a "FREEWARE" producer .... as I assume Peter LIDER must be too !
In these situations the law allows one to manufacture and market the "likeness" of aircraft of any particular producer .... so long as you're not on-selling it commercially, and by implication, making money out of the original producers design/product or name .... and that's what makes the difference Ben .... regardless of hoe how petty or unjustified it may all seem !
"IF" one's commercially marketing/selling the "likeness" of someone elses product or name .... or both .... then by law one's usually obliged to buy/negotiate a "VENDORS CONTRACT" (pay royalties etc) to the registered owner/name bearer of the original product before one ever has right to commercially on-sell/market any replica. If one doesn't observe and practice that in this day and age then one can expect to be "TAKEN TO THE CLEANERS" .... or at least threatened .... which is what I believe Garry touched on above !
Mark C AKL/NZ
|
|
|
Post by garryrussell on Dec 11, 2008 20:41:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by gus on Dec 12, 2008 1:07:49 GMT
Hello, On the same matter .. I readed some very heated discussion on a forum concerning the game IL2 The develloper was not able to add in the game for the Pacific campaign the Grumman Avenger (torpedo-bomber) as Grumman forbid it... It was a discussion as the Grumman Avenger was a war plane and so the funding .. for this plane .. from the pencil for make the drawing to the last rivet was issued by the taxpayers money The idea was .... if Grumman want royalties .. all the money collected was to be returned to the taxpayers It was not the property of the Grumman company but the property of the US citizen Regards.
|
|
|
Post by bluestar on Dec 12, 2008 4:25:10 GMT
Garry,
>Grumman won't allow there aircraft to be made for FS<
I just went over to the AVSIM library and there are over 480 files that are Grumman aircraft and over 280 files that are Gulfstream aircraft.
FSX has a Grumman aircraft in it. Combat Simulator has a Grumman Avenger.
Psycho Billy
|
|