When will the NAMAC ys11 and Fokker f27 be available in Carrer mode, plus was wondering when we can fly the Inibuilds 406 caravan II, tri star, a300, MU2, shorts skyvan sc7, a350 in career mode
Wondering that myself. I donât remember which, but one of those was advertised when it launched as having Career support, so no idea what happened there.
These would be questions for iniBuilds as theyâre 3rd party aircraft of theirs. A350 was technically Career compatible prior to a sim update (I think SU3 or SU4?) which changed the requirements which broke it, and it hasnât been fixed since. The 406 Caravan II was also marketed as being Career mode compatible, but it never has been.
I think they said they have a separate project going internally focused on adding Career mode support to all/most/any of their aircraft that make sense, rather than it being part of each aircraftâs development pipeline. Iâm not 100% sure I believe that, or at least believe that itâs any sort of priority, but only iniBuilds can really speak to that.
I expect these will become Career compatible when theyâre updated in a future Aircraft & Avionics Update. According to the most recent roadmap, theyâre planning one more (AAU6) this November which will probably update five (5) more aircraft - maybe one or both of those will be included.
1 Like
Inibuilds and PMDG arenât doing career mode
Inibuilds actually said they were had a big career mode announcement with the A350, then decided to make another 8 aircraft, 25 airports and some double jetways for their upcoming A380 which also wonât be in career mode. So they have other priorities
PMDG says their customers donât use career mode, which is true because their aircraft arenât in career mode 
gaslit noted
Other devs have turned back the clock made their fleet modular and we can now use in career mode, like the Citation X which is superb
3 Likes
Been flying Neoflyâs career mode because neofly is doing a better job at getting a lot of these aircraft into their career mode than Microsoft / Asobo
Yes, because thereâs no real wear and tear in Neofly, among other things. Neofly is a much more barebones mode (in some ways) so of course itâs simpler to incorporate an aircraft into it. Kind of canât compare the two in that way, in my opinion.
3 Likes
I prefer Asobos wear and tear which requires an engine replacement every 48hrs of flight timeâŠ
Said no one ever 
Agree with @Kulch , MS/Asobo do not make a fair wear and tear. Some parts have an excessive amount of wear. Engine wear, airframe wear and tire wear and pumping needs changing reducing.
I think much of that is intentional for balance reasons. Do you need to pay too much and too often for repairs compared to real life? Probably. Do airlines also make $10 million off a single flight? Definitely not. They can make the repair cadence more realistic, but if they do that I think theyâd also majorly reduce payout to balance it out - and that would frustrate everyone for different reasons. Canât really win without just making it incredibly easy.
My only gripe with wear and tear/maintenance is the UX.
I used to like career mode. Progressing through the different tears. Building up your company.
but now it is really boring. Always the same weather, the same time of day. The same missions. The same stupid conversations of the passengers. Maintenance takes too much time and is repetitive.
In order to improve career mode I would suggest the ability to change some or more settings like;
-life weather/time
-life traffic (one that does not block you on busy airports)
-option to switch of conversations (or make it a lot more random and less woke)
-automate maintenance (maybe at a credit cost)
I recognize that they added a lot of missions and I do like that a lot, but it is a little too late. Flight sim is still one of the most beautiful programs to have on a computer, but there is room for improvement.
1 Like
I agree they do not make 10 million a flight but neither do they replace an engine every few hours.
Also, if you build up your company IRL, you do not end up becomming unprofitable because you do not earn enough when your other aircraft fly. So when I say the maintenance fees are not fair, I am referring to the passive aircraft. One can accept the maintenance on the 1 that you fly because that does earn enough to sustain itself.
If you are a very big company like say Fedex with a ton of planes they all earn that 10 million (hypothetical amount of course) ie each. Now in sim, one is lucky if your 10 mil earner (if your employee flies it) earns 1 mill! That is why there is constantly and earnings shortfall.
If the passive planes earned more OR had cheaper maintenance all round that would be satidfactory - it is probable easier to get them to earn a higher percentage than reduce all the maintenance fees.
Hopefully folk can see the rationales here.
Thatâs my point - both things are out of whack with reality, but I think are probably more-or-less in balance with each other. Would you prefer replacing an engine significantly less often if it meant you only made a small fraction of what you currently earn now?
I am referring to the passive aircraft economy - that is out of whack. The one I fly is fine in terms of costs - it is all the others (ie passive) which do not earn sufficient to sustain maintenance.
1 Like
The main issue with the passive maintenance fees are they are unsustainable on airliners if you fly medium cargo and below type AC, this includes VIP and medivac and everything except passenger and heavy cargo.. Ie you wonât earn enough money in VIP or medium cargo to cover the maintenance costs of your passenger fleet. You will go bankrupt.
So you will need to uncrew your passenger fleet, with no 1 click uncrew all option.
They should just fix the engine wear and tear a slight adjustment will go a long way so we can continue to fly any specialisation we wish and keep things crewed and passive and trickle income. If they halved the wear n tear engine rates or halved the costs if we manually maintain them, everything would fall into a better place, without having to micro manage our fleet with the tedious poor UX that comes with it
Back to the main subject of the thread we need Asobo to pull down the barriers, roadblocks and speed bumps to make it easier for 3rd party to make career mode AC.
Itâs good to see some really nice planes finally arrive from TFDI, FlightFX and FSR. But it would be the absolute goal to have PMDG, Inibuilds and Blackbird also on board the career mode train
Iâm unsure what kind of extra work is involved, but FlightFx went back and retro fixed their plane for career mode via modular, TFDI also have done it, so wondering why canât the others? Is it too hard, too demanding or not cost effective. When Inibuilds started the A380 knowing full well career mode is a thing do they even consider it? PMDG 747 currently in the oven cooking away, is it being considered for career mode? While we may not expect them to retrofix old fleet ones that are currently in development, hopefully with the guidance of Asobo upcoming fleet can make their way into career mode. Career mode is only getting better, the more good planes that come only makes the mode more popular
3 Likes
For light cargo we need the carenado Cessna 207A, Piper Dakota, carenado Cessna 182t, pc6, and for passengers we need the passenger Cessna 408, and default twin otter
2 Likes
And I need the carenado 182 q 182RG, and 210 centurion for light cargo and the caribou local legend for medium cargo
Why there is no sea plane ops despite there are plenty of float planes in the sim?
2 Likes
Likely just dealing the complexity of modeling âground opsâ which are currently a required part of Career missions.
Agree, we have many great amphibious craft and I am sure seaplane bases/missions are no more difficult to create than land based missions
folks can vote here for these
You might be able to get away with adding the default Grumman seaplaneâs and the twin otter floats because they are all able to land on land, same with the DeHavilland beaver C172 amphibion and the c208 on floats also
1 Like