ok, for the last few days I tryed to get a harrier that could hoover, and in the process I realize how limited fs2004 is!

I mean you can't have thrust changeable vectors, you can't have two engines in two diferent directions, you can't have runways or decks(carriers) with an angle!!

is this as real as it gets? I've been playing fs sims since fs4 back in the early 90's and that was version number 4!! they had 20 years to add things and they still didn't add this??

this days almost every new jet fighter has vectorial nozzles some to a greater extend (harrie, f-35) others less (Eurofighter,f22,etc), and that's the way it will go!vectorial nozzles that make planes do stuff that 20 years ago would seem impossible!!

will we have to stop having real behaving planes? and what about angle decks and runways? who can tell me of a runway that has an 0º inclination? it's very diferent to land in a rwy that is going dwn or one that is going up!!

so...I think we all should email microsoft asking to add this features, and I mean everybody! not only as individuals but as organizations! every VA should send an email that represents the VA position, all fs sites (like this one) administrators should send one also! we must flood them!

besides this particular things that I said there's probably much more that you would like to had so:

why not make a poll and have a list of stuff that we would like to see changed and that way we all could send the same petition, wich would cause a greater impact!!

well I hope that someone reads till the end of the post

thks all

I'm not saying it's not a good sim!It's  a great sim, and I love it!I just think that this particular things are not that dificult to implement  and it would open an huge window for modelers! there's also civil version of the v-22 coming out, and that too needs vectorial thrust!
I love this sim, just trying to make it better

Quote:


I agree...there is probably a good reason why MS programmers decided to not include the thrust vector issue mentioned above.

I miss many things in FS, far too many to bring up here, but most of them are about the Boeings, which are a joke in Flight simulator.
When flying the default commercial jets, you're not running a simulator, you're playing an arcade game...

I have to agree with Felix. It's true that there are all sorts of features we would all like to see but we each have different ideas on what those are. It's quite likely that some of these things are already possible. It needs some talented freeware developer to find them. This is the beauty of the open-architecture structure of the M$ sims & their main attraction for many users.

Personally, I think it's a shame that with CFS3 being in a completely different format the impetus for continuous development of FS as a whole has been lost. I could never understand why the CFS2 Ships were not included with FS2002/4 for use as "AI traffic". This seemed so obvious to me. The AI aircraft themselves use the same basic principle first introduced with CFS1. There are many other examples of features developed in CFS that are now commonplace in FS.

I agree with Hyperion MS did not mean for this sim to be used for real pilot training. Its for those of us that have a love for flying and others to just sit and relieve some stress and have fun.

Quote:


You bought it.

If I might throw my own two cents in; the MSFS series especially FS9 - can be extremely useful both for pilots and for students.
NOT for flight training - 90 per cent of what one experiences in flight comes from you ears and butt, not your eyes. Flying is a very intuitive task.
But where the FS series helps is in teaching a pilot all those things that comes with time - the ability to multitask (read the map, communicate on-air while keeping the plane intact, etc.). It gives - or can give a basic working knowledge of flight instruments and procedures, should a student decide to use it for such. For myself; I've used the series frequently to aid my real-life flight.  I'll use it while planning a flight; to mark down time checks, frequencies and rough fixes, if I'm going somewhere I heven't been, I'll fly it the night before to get a (very) rough idea of ground features. (FS ground features are in some cases startlingly accurate; but even 100% accuracy in a sim doesn't look anything like real-life. But you can see that such-and-such a lake has this shape from this heading, and so forth.)
That being said; FS2004 is lacking features. Big deal - it's got a lot in it already. It's a sim; it can't - and never can - be a paradigm for real-life; there's always going to be something missing. Personally, I miss the lack of flexibility in tower control - MS towers have about two or three useful functions, that's it - in real life; a controller is a pilot's best friend. But hey - it's a sim. I suppose if someone wanted to get a Cray II or similar computer; work with it for an aeon or two, he could come up with a sim that truly represents real-life; but until then; I like FS9 just the way it is - moddability included.
Cheers!

I still think that MS could put in extra effort.

After all each year they simply build on an existing product and still charge the same sum of money.

If you consider how much FS has changed from its first ever release and then compare that with the changes over the past 4 years, its just a tad disappointing.

Its not that I hate it, but you have to agree that a few more enhancements could have shipped this (last) year.

After all, to succeed you need to give 110%

Lol ,thats a bad excuse.

I know that most systems dont produce amazing results with FS, but thats the visual aspect.

Im sure tweaking the physics engine would never produce a game that is unplayable.

People are going to complain, no matter what the topic or how disappointed they are in a program that they purchased.

However, there is hope for these kinds of people, because they're perfectly allowed to sell the product which disappoints them so on a site you may have heard of called ebay.com.

Yet they don't ever do it.  Why is that?  Could it be they just like to complain?

ok, I think we still are going in diferent ways!! everyone's saying that the poor guys are doing the best they can, that we still play the game, that  it's a game not real life, etc,etc! so...!?!? they're being payd to do that!! oh, the poor guys are doing sleepless nights to do the physics!!!they're being payd to do that!It's their job!! They probably like what they're doing!!! Microsoft is a multi million dollar company, I don't feel sorry for them!! I love FS9 and I think it's the best sim around and I even think they're doing a veery good job, but as a custumer I have the right to ask for more!!! and I want more!! and even if they put in the game what I said I want, I'll still be writing emails to ask for more because that's what I'm suposed to do as a customer! I pay for their product, they're not doing me a favour so that I should think :" oh, the poor guys. ok, I'd like to have this and this, but I won't ask because they work to hard!!" .
   As I said: they're doing a great job, and I love the sim, and I paid the money gladly and will continue to pay to have this sim, but I'll also continue to ask for more!!!!

Quote:


I think most of us will second that comment Doug... ...!

Paul.

P.S. I like Hyperion's previous quote..."IT'S A GAME!"
LOL... ...!

Cleobis, Just a bit of info, check out nasa's runway at the cape, it has a rise and fall of less than 1/8" for its entire leanth.

Steve

we all appreciate the programmers effort, I do, very much! but I'll still be asking more!!andof course that I'm not talking about freeware designers, wich do alot more than one could expect!!to the freeware guys I only have one thing to say: THANK YOU!!!
As for the others (ms ones), also thank you, but please do even more..hehe:D

20 to 1 !!!

Exactly how many aircraft were shot down in the falklands conflict?
Im not great in modern history, but I can only recall a few aircraft.

Quote:

You don't need books when you have the WWW. I found this in less than 1 minute on Google.
http://freespace.virgin.net/gordon.smith4/F64argaircraftlost.htm

thanks for the link:) i did try a few searches but obviously my key words wernt correct
i would like to say this shows the true ability of the harrier, the sad fact is, they were up against pilots with little ability but tons of heart.