| |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Letters to the Editors This Page was last updated: 1/12/99 12:27:49 PM | |||||||
|
AVSIM Online welcomes your opinions, and we will try to post as many a possible. Please send your letters to the AVSIM Staff (staff@avsim.com) or click here to use your browser's mailing dialog. Please use "Letter to the Editors" as the subject line of your message. Letters will be posted as they are received, in newest to oldest order. We ask that you include your real name and email address, which will be published with your letters. Your letters may be edited for length and grammar. All submissions are subject to AVSIM's Terms and Conditions of Use. AVSIM Online reserves the right not to post any letters deemed inappropriate for any reason.
January 11, 1999
Warbirds
Warbirds may have many faults regarding "accuracy" and "realism" when it comes to flight dynamics, but it is designed with performance in mind, and believe me, it performs! in order to successfully compete in the various arenas, one has to master the all of the usual combat flight maneuvers: Immelman, cuban-8, split s, etc. and not only can they be executed realistically, all of these maneuvers can be performed at a good frame rate (50 fps) by most pc's. So although it may lack in the "true to life" department regarding gauges and navigational procedures, it is a good vehicle for acrobatic maneuvers.
The sim can be downloaded for free and played on your pc alone or vs another player via modem without any charges, or you can join the mayhem in the main arenas for a small fee (your mileage may vary). ;-)
The Mac version has had a long history of lacking or falling behind in the implementation of features compared to the pc version; however considering that the longest time it was one of the few really good flight sims available for that platform, it is a blessing that any version for the Mac OS exists at all. Many thanks are owed to to the management and to "Caligula" Evans, who pushed on with the development of the project, even while he faced the hardship of terminal health problems.
Because of the ADB ports macs used, the joysticks and other extra equipment were also much more expensive and hard to come by. You really had to be a hard core simmer and a true Mac OS fanatic to put up with all the barriers that were in your way.
Warbirds also is one of the precursors of online flying, something MSFS fans are enjoying more and more, and they have developed the experience to a fine art, since on a good "internet" day you can dogfight all you want without loss of frames or slow down.
Have a nice day gentlemen, and check six!
January 15, 1999
Apollo: my wallet and feet won't increase your profits
I'm among the Apollo boycotts. Not because of their using copyrighted material without owner consent which I believe is the equivalent of stealing, but because of their subsequent actions and apparent attitude; despite their apology, admission, negotiations with Eric's and Staffan's representative and an update on their Site that I understand only contains original
work.
When a company or anyone is allowed to profit by theft as I believe Apollo is, displays an insulting attitude, implies that it's OK to use material that doesn't contain use and distribution restrictions and call it your own, I as an FS hobbyist, consumer and mature individual have to let the offender(s) know in no uncertain terms that I do not tolerate such behavior. Telling them so (in Apollo's case) and leaving it there isn't enough but voting with one's wallet and feet at the very least will serve as a caution to companies and individuals who might otherwise digress as Apollo has.
Until this matter is resolved to my satisfaction, I vote with my wallet by not purchasing Apollo products. Furthermore, I vote with my feet by not browsing sites, reading publications and so on that appear to endorse Apollo by virtue of Apollo ads or promotional press releases. Consequently, I may lose some of my enjoyment of the hobby because my position limits or restricts my access to info and updates for add-ons I'm considering, using or already purchased. Such is the price when one rises above the likes of Apollo and places serving and strengthening the FS Community and the community at large ahead of short-term personal gain.
Bottom Line. A company whose primary objective is profit is bound to repeat profitable actions. Fortunately, we as consumers have direct control over who profits and who doesn't.
Barry E. Cameron
January 15, 1999
Apollo's theft
I was really amazed at J mathes letter. Did he even realise that it was Apollo who stole the panels not Avsim?
I would like to know what actions Avsim is supposed to accept responsibility for. If it is printing what Apollo have been doing then I am sure you will be happy to do so.
As for Apollo. The only reason they were "mature" enough to accept responsibility for their actions was because they were caught red handed, and if you think that rediculous letter they sent out was accepting
responsibilty then you can't have read it.
J Mathes, for whatever reason, seems to be having a go at the wrong people, or is it ok to steal other peoples goods? If he wants to have a go at your journalistic style, then fine, but don't use Eric's problems with Apollo as an excuse.
Finally, if this is some kind of propoganda machine I am sure you would not have printed Mathes letter.
And as far as I am concerned I will not be buying anything from Apollo again.
Kind regards
January 11, 1999
Apollo thing
You were unsuccessful in boycotting Flight Simulator 98, you'll be equally as unsuccessful in damaging Apollo in the long run.
I don't like your style. I have a hard time believing that you are trying to represent both sides equally. I was under the impression that journalists were suppose to represent the news without bias or opinion, letting their readers decide for themselves. Your handling of the Apollo situation is filled with both passionate bias and opinion. I find you an un-credible source and your integrity as a newsworthy source equals that of most tabloid journalists.
I am not condoning Apollo's actions, but at the very least, your ethics are at the most, equal to theirs and at the least, far below. At least they had the maturity to accept responsibility for their actions. Will you do the same?
I am assuming that this letter will probably be deemed inappropriate, and therefore, not published on your 'letters to the editor' page, once again affirming that your real loyalties are to your own ego and propaganda machine, and not pure news and the truth.
Yours truly,
January 10, 1999
The Apollo farce
I've taken the time to read the Apollo position on the freeware theft a few
times now, and am more and more surprised at each turn. The positions that
surprise me most are:
"The panel that was used as a template came off the internet and included
only install instructions, with no restrictions for further use in own,
derivative products." Really? I've used many of Eric and Steffan's panels and have never found
one posted that did not include the caveat that said files are copyrighted
materials that were not to be used in payware.
"It has turned out that certain copyrighted bitmap elements have obviously
been used inadvertently by one of the contributing designers." As others have said here, I find it reprehensible that Apollo would attempt to defend their use of somebody else's work by saying "Hey, our contractor
did it."
As an IS professional, I have to take offense at this. If anybody in my
group used another company's copyrighted software in a commercial endeavor
without first clearing it with the owner, I'm sure that we'd wind up sued.
The defense that "a contractor did it" is absurd, and hopefully will not
stand up.
Keep up the good work, Avsim.
Bill Pappert
Freeware question
Congratulations on your stand on the "Apollo affair" and also your reply to
their 'smokescreen' letter. Well done!
You set out the facts as you you found them, in your role as simming
reporters. This is what you are supposed to do. I'm with you!
To my mind Apollo has not come out of this with a lot of credibility. I
believe they will need to do better than this to retain the respect of the
simming community.
Keep up the good work
Bill Slattery
Theft of Copyrighted Software
I agree with AVSIM's approach and position concerning this matter.
Since I have been in contact with Eric to urge him to press the case,
and since he had already made efforts to get redress from Apollo, no
one, least of all the executive at Apollo, can criticise your approach.
There was absolutely no jumping the gun on your part. As to Apollo, I
don't care how big they are, they are responsible whether it was done by
an employee or contractor. Therefore they should have bitten the bullet
and responded quickly to all parties. Trying to point the finger at
someone else and criticisizing AVSIM for publicly blowing the whistle
after a suitable period of time is inexcusable.
Having said that, this is not the first event of this kind, and
especially from abroad. There have been many problems with collections
of freeware data being distributed from Europe, the Middle East and
Asia. Although theoretically they subscribe to world copyright laws,
there seems to be considerable laxity in enforcement when the copyright
does not originate in the local area. If the copyright originated in the
EEC area for example, and someone purloined it, every one of those
countries would make an issue of it in the world court. The U.S.
Government via the Department of Commerce should make more of an effort
in supporting copyrighted material from here but they don't.
Keep up the good work! Support the freeware authors.
Apollo Software
What would Apollo's reaction have been if the situation was reversed? Some
freeware author using their work. I'm sure they wouldn't have accepted a "brushing under the table" attitude.
It would have been a litigation nightmare for the culprit.
I won't buy Apollo. Thanks to all freeware authors for your work - don't be
discouraged because you are appreciated.
David Porrett
Freeware/Apollo
Firstly, a hearty congratulations to AVSIM on a web site that is purely
awesome, I've watched AVSIM development and it is a tribute to the folk
who put and keep AVSIM together and to their dedication to all of our
hobby: flight simming!! Yes, AVSIM has sponsors, but there is nothing
wrong with that and in fact is a healthy marriage of the
commercial/freeware markets.
I am with any party who agrees that our flight sim. freeware artists
must be protected from improper intrusion or use of their software. At
the same time, we must be able to encourage our commercial flightsim
companies to continue to produce excellent products. Perhaps Apollo
mis-stepped, perhaps they didn't. Maybe the Apollo "apology" was
disappointing, maybe it was just fine. I just hate to see these factions
butt heads too much because in the end, the end user, all of us flight
simmers who so dearly love our hobby lose.
Frankly, I want both... I want the freeware, the shareware and the
commercial products and I insist that they all learn to get along
because there is a place for everyone in this thing.
Ernst and company should not have had their freeware exploited,
that is for sure. I choose to believe that Apollo did this innocently
and has learned a lesson in it. Commercial companies live and die by
their reputations so I'm sure Apollo will not be making the same mistake
again.
So let's shake hands, get the "I'm sorries" out of the way, learn the
lessons there are to be learned and continue on in the fine tradition
of all great flight sim companies and sites, whether they be AVSIM,
Apollo, Flightsim.com, Simflight.com, AETI, ect., ect., ect. and the
hundreds/thousands of men and women like Mr. Ernst have web sites or
have contributed their wonderful freeware to our wonderful industry.
Randy Jura
What is wrong with contrition?
I was very happy that Tom chose my editorial as being worthy enough for publication. I stood by Apollo's
management, with the thin hope that indeed this was a terrible mistake made by one man. Whether or not that is
actually the case, the response from Apollo has angered me to no end.
I ask one question. What is wrong with contrition? Now the president of Apollo, confronted with clear copyright violation, targets its accusers and instead lauds its own accomplishments. Is there something wrong with being contrite? Is there something wrong with "I'm sorry, and we promise it won't ever happen again"? I suppose the president of Apollo feels that if our own President can get away with it, so can he.
Well, not in this household. I was sickened by President Clinton's attempt to cloud the issues, just as I am sick by Apollo President's effort to muddy the waters. Has our society advanced to such a lowly state, that courtesy is no longer required? The president of Apollo may truly be sorry, but it seems to me that he is sorry that he got caught, not that he performed the act in the first place.
I said in my counterpoint that we should hold off lighting the torches and suspend any attempt at a witch hunt until we hear both sides of the story. Apollo has made their statement, and I have heard both sides of the story. Apollo, I publicly vow never to buy a product from your company again. I also urge all simmer's who are concerned about this issue to boycott all Apollo products, and promptly return any Apollo products you may have to the company.
(That includes all Post-BAO era products distributed by Apollo). I think we need to send a message that we will
not have such filth infecting our hard drives. It's time we teach Apollo the true meaning of ethics, and that there is such thing as honor and doing the right thing.
January 9, 1999
AVSIM,
I was very happy to see you stand up for yourselves and clearly point
out
Mr. Stoerzer's attempt divert attention from the facts. Shame on you
Mr.
Stoerzer! Your deliberate attack on my profession has cost you my
business
forever!
Good Job AVSIM!
Dave Cochran
Hero's Welcome
AVSIM,
Superb work on the Apollo crisis. It is a real (and perhaps unexpected)
pleasure to see you act on standards of professional journalism. I
admire both your courage and your dedication to finding and printing the
truth.
Anything that we, in the community, can do to encourage your
efforts...please let us know.
Thanks for the example!
Hello Tom and Avsim Team.
I was absolutely amazed at the response from Apollo to Avsim. While I
was reading it I kept thinking when it is going to get to the point and how
dare "Apollo" brush off this blatant Freeware theft with a statement that was
more like a publicity add for the company than an apology.
It is interesting to note that Apollo passes the blame off to the
contractor/s who used the material. From my position as a computer
programmer I know that the company is at fault as far as the public are
concerned and the material that they use from the contractors is their
responsibility.
I will never ever purchase another product from Apollo , not because of
the freeware theft but because of their uncaring attitude and response to
the accusations. I see Flight Simulator users and developers as a COMMUNITY.
Apollo's response in my opinion shows that they do not give a darn about
the FS community.
I love Flight Simulator and I love to contribute to it without
remuneration. I have nothing against 3rd party vendors in fact I am very impressed
with Abacus and their attitude to the FS community.
I believe that Flight Simulator would not be where it is today had it
not been for the original pioneers who pulled the bgl structure apart and
began to provide this information to all and sundry and allowed for any
developer or user to ENHANCE Flight Simulator.
Thank you for bringing the FACTS of the matter to my attention. I do not
agree with Apollo about your role in this matter.
In fact I am sure that most simmers like me always look to your Web page
to be kept abreast of these situations.
Thank You
Neil Park
August 8, 1998
Hi
I am a sometime user of MSFS98 which I enjoy very much. I
fly it at 1024 x 768 resolution on my large screen. It is
great!
So I bought PP98, what a disappointment to be flying at 648
x 480! With my eyes, I have trouble finding the runway I
just took off from!
I think that I will wait for comments before buying PP99.
(Once bitten twice shy!)
Have you tried contacting Sierra? They hide behind their
support system.
The best sim in my opinion is EF2000, to bad they don't
support third party add on's like MS.
Regards
August 8, 1998 Dear Editor: 1st may I say thanks to you at Avsim for posting the transcript of the chat from the Sierra team since I was unable to attend. Well It look like Pro Pilot 99 will NOT be in my collection. My OLD Pro Pilot 98 is collecting enough dust as it is. The way I see it , the sim is Pro Pilot 98 with a little window dressing or shall I say Salad dressing to hide the the 98 features. Flight Sim98 may have its faults but even with those we still have MORE VISUAL FEATURES than what Sierra is going to give. 1. FS98 already had transparent clouds. 2. WE HAVE TAXI WAYS, better yet COMPLETE AIRPORTS. and it covers the WHOLE freaking world. 3. HAY we can fly the HEAVIES, with a little help from all you pilots out there the flight models could be IMPROVED. 4. ATC, Pro-Pilot99 is going be the same old deal, I already bought my ProPilot99 and its name is PROFLIGHT 98 which I think is the best ATC add-on available. Well that's my 2 cents, and I'll keep them along with the other 4998 pennies in my pocket or maybe spend them on the upcoming FLY Sim, That will be worth the money just to see the weather RAINING on our parade. I've been an avid simmer since 1981 and have spent boo coo bucks on sims that were not worth the money, I think its time they get it right or don't do it at all. August 7, 1998 Dear Robert and Bill I live in Belgium. Last year I purchased PP98 and like many others, was disappointed by the product and by Sierra, for having taken our money in exchange of an unfinished product (just like buying a Chevy with no back seats, missing tire etc...), and for having fooled us with fake videos and fake screen shots. Like many others I awaited, awaited for corrective patches that came in bits (sometimes 6MB size) and pieces that finally took my trust in Sierra to pieces. Last month (stupidity? exagerated enthusiasm?), I purchased Sierra PP Europe thinking that Sierra had corrected their original product's flaws. Again, I was disappointed for the same reasons as the first time. They fooled us more by printing on page 2 of the installation leaflet (the one in the CD box), under the heading "System Requirements" : Supports 3dfx Voodoo graphics cards! Now we see more beautifull videos pre-selling Sierra PP99. What I am missing is hearing or reading from Sierra, why after having been fooled by them, we should trust them once more. My feeling is that we are heading for another disappointment. With best regards, August 7, 1998 Dear Editor: I bought proPilot only last week and feel cheated that they are now bringing out another. Will they issue a patch for my 3DFX card or will I have to buy the new prog? If I have to buy then the rebate they intend to offer will not be enough to tempt me. Again, I feel cheated. August 7, 1998 Dear Editor: I will buy the new product if certain conditions will be assured:
August 6, 1998 Editors: Hello, this letter concerns Pro Pilot. I have very high hopes for Pro Pilot, it is in my opinion much better and more realistic than Microsoft's Flight Simulator series. In spite of the unresolved problems with Pro Pilot, I enjoy it very much more. I have taken some real flight lessons, I was a UH-1 helicopter mechanic/crew chief in the Indiana National Guard and now work as an Airframe & Powerplant mechanic at my hometown regional airport. I love flying, real and simulated. I feel that Pro Pilot has a lot of potential, and I am looking forward to new releases, addons, and such. The new version coming out in October sounds great, but I must be honest and say I probably will not purchase it until I see fixes for the old version. There is nothing I hate worse than buying buying software that doesn't work correctly, I will say you have come a long way with the old version from its original release, but it still needs some work. Probably the biggest complaints I have about it is when you are on the runway taking off or on final, the front view gives the impression you are only doing about 5 mph, this really ruins the experience. The autopilot is basically junk, I can't seem to get it to do anything more than hold altitude... sometimes. As I said before I really do like Pro pilot much better than Microsoft FS, I know there are always growing pains and you have done a great job overall. I'm sure you will get the original version fixed at some point, when I see that happen I will probably go right out and get the 99 version; but not until then. If this sim turns out to be what I think and hope it's going to be, you will have a happy new customer and Microsoft will be short one! August 6, 1998 Dear Editor: I originally bought ProPilot from Sierra direct inJune of 1997; the Program was shipped on 5 Dec,1997. Despite the two patches, I have to say that I have never truly felt that the program lived up to its concept, its design or its advertising. On learning that there would be only a $20 rebate on a program which would cost 49.95, I saw no point in keeping a $62.00 program (including shipping) that would never be used. I have therefore removed the program from my hard drive and returned it to Sierra. Depending on what sort or reviews ProPilot 99 gets after its release, I may well buy it, but at that point , I'll only have to spend $49.95 for it as opposed to having $92.00 invested with Sierra. I think Sierra's rebate is essentially of no value; at least not to me. August 6, 1998 Editors: I bet as usual the rebate will only go to residents of the USA and Canada (as always). I am already pissed that a version is already out that includes Europe after buying the US only version. I would not pay the full whack again. If there is no rebate then I will have to buy a black market copy (I regret to say). August 6, 1998 Dear Editor: The rebate has no meaning to some unknown percentage of SP98 users. This is due to the questionable decision of Sierra to only support the 3DFX video cards. Is this unwise? Well we, at first, belive it is. However, they may have been forced into this unwelcome position by the circumstance of timing and resources. The Christmas season once again looms on their horizon. There are several other less clear issues that may render the rebate meaningless. There are no new, industry break-thru, functions being incorporated into SP99. Once you go beyond 3D, in fact, all of the functionality of SP99 is already available in SP98. The only problem is that not all of it works. The real issue, in my opinion, is the support of third party addons. I have sent numerous messages to Sierra detailing how to use addons to their advantage. The people in receipt of the messages thought the ideas to have merit. Unfortunately, we now see a closed system. Purity of operation is cited as a reason. I suspect that some mis-guided marketing VP believes they can sell addons themselves. My suggestion was to license third party addons in the same manner that Intel sells "Intel Inside" stickers. Once again, in my opinion, the lack of support for the myriad of types of addons will be a strategic flaw that will doom the product to diehards, to those who do not have the background of SP98, or do not have an understanding of the competition. SP99 does not have the terrain modeling market differentiation of SP98. As I said earlier, all of the other features are also not unique. Add to the lack of differentiation, the baggage of past marketing tactics and you have a product that is seriously burdened way prior to it hitting the shelves. August 4, 1998 Editors: In response to your request I submit hereunder my comments relative to the publication of SPP99. I am an IFR rated private pilot with over 25 years experience in SEL and light twins. This is not to impress you but rather to indicate that I think I do know how to fly an airplane. I also have used all the MSFS since the version made compatible with the initial release of the IBM PC. Therefore I think I know how to use a flight sim. SPP98 was a disaster except for the terrain elevations and the cutesy mountains. For this reason alone I will not buy SPP99. However my major reason is the arrogance of the Sierra company. The majority of users will arguably agree that the sim was issued to cash in on the Christmas market even though Sierra knew or should have known that the release was so buggy that it should have not foisted on a gullible public. Sierra has consistently ignored that undeniable fact. The only way that they can recoup some credibility is a public confession of its sins. The mea culpa might alleviate the sick-to-the-stomach feeling when I hear the name "Sierra". August 4, 1998 Editors:
Simmer for over 10 years and have most product of flight sims. I purchased PP when it first came out and my sentiments as the other letters to the editor. However, I have an additional responce to Sierra and that is, as I have been saying to other simmers, PP has one of the most powerful platform available but it just does not fly. If you can come with a good flight model, and roads between, highways, etc; you will have a real powerful program. Aside the flight model, it is power as it but we want to fly. Wish you the best,
August 4, 1998 Editors: Greetings gentlemen. I just finished your FAQ in avsim.com on PP99. This sounds very promising as an alternative to my FS98 and I will purchase it. However, I must tell you I was less than impressed with PP98 even after the patch. The panels are awesome, the sound is great, and the multiple views from inside and outside beat the stock FS98 hands-down. However, there is one dark cloud hanging over PP where FS98 is concerned. You mentioned that your product is superior to FS98 in one aspect by stating FS98 owners need to purchase add-ons and upgrades for $200-$300. This is only half true. The other half of the equation is the hundreds of freeware programs for planes, panels, GPS, weather, and others available for download across the web for FS98 users. Fortunately the guys that write these are not biting the commercial hook that's out there trying to buy their programs and sell it. In all fairness, I have not heard what your plans are for making PP99 available to freeware. I do understand you want to capture the newbie and casual simming market, (admittimgly FS98 is less than newbie-friendly) but users will eventually get more advanced and look for new challenges just as I have. So far FS98 is the only sim out there that allows for (free) growth as the user gets more advanced, and that will be a hard king to topple. In any event, I look forward to purchasing your product and hope it becomes a serious contender to FLY! as well a nice alternative to FS98. Regards,
August 3, 1998 Editors: If this product is everything the write up says, I will buy it,however SIERRA has dissapointed me in the past with PRO PILOT.There is so much about it that I like, maybe because it reminds me so much of the old ATP which started me on this simulator madness.The rebate offer will be a great incentive after the headaches with PRO PILOT. Regards
August 3, 1998 Editors: I have struggled with PP98 for several month's now. I see great potential in the simulator, but as you know the bugs and graphics have been a big problem. I also have Ms 98 simulator and Flight Unlimited, both of which are first class. These are the ones I fly on a regular basis. I fully expected to Sierra release a 3dfx patch free of charge over the net as all other major sims suppliers have. I doubt if I will pay $50 for 3d and have to wait 2 to 3 months for a $20 rebate. I think Sierra should make it more attractive for current owners. Imagic only charged $10. for the v5.0 upgrade of iF22 which was no worse off than Pro Pilot. Thanks,
August 2, 1998 Editors: I, for one, think that SPP is a great program... I enjoy flying it and I'm looking forward to SPP99. (I'll take the $20 rebate..) I've purchased at least 6 releases of FS over time as well as countless add-ons, including several releases of sceneries, designers, and so on. ...not to mention the maps, books etc. SPP was off to a bad start with the early version, but to Sierra's credit, they have fixed most of what was wrong.. Now that I've upgraded from my trusty P166 to a PII266, this program actually flies very well and I'm looking forward to the 3dfx enhanced version! August 2, 1998 Editors: I don't think i will buy the new version fo pro pilot. i think they should give me a copy free since i've paid for a program and it doesn't work. most of the features they say the new program will have they said the old program had. i don't think i will buy it.
first time their fault. August 1, 1998 Editors: I would like to think I would spend my money on Pro-Pilot 99 as I did on the first one, but its scenery is terrible and the planes have no detail. I must say it wouldn't be all that bad only if they could provide more detailed major airport scenery & flight models, i.e., flaps etc. I use a Pentium2 400 with 128mb, 8mb ATI Rage 3D Graphics card and I was not impressed with Pro Pilot. As a European (Irish, in fact) I would like to see some expansion to the planes, but its the scenery that must look good with some detail in it. I got a refund on Pro Pilot Europe version, as I was not totally convinced with the scenery, it was blocky and flat. Well thats it, let's hope they do better. P.S All's not that bad. I try to promote Sierra Pro-Pilot on my web site. Regards, August 1, 1998 Editors: I sent in a Sierra rebate on ProPilot 98,never got a reply.The program
was in my opinion not suitable for public offering. I will not buy
another Sierra product.
July 31, 1998 Editors: I purchased Pro Pilot 1/3/98 and, like everybody else it seems, I believed their hype about the sim. I was excited about having a new sim that that took all the good things about MSFS and built upon that base. The screen shots looked pretty good and the panels were much better than MSFS. As soon as the program was loaded I fired it up and as soon as I saw the mini movie at the begining I thought this was going to be great. When the start airport was loaded I thought I had been had. I didn't even have to run the program to realise that the graphics were going to be crap. After loading the first patch I removed the program from my HD and never installed it again. I'm going to wait for the reviews to come in before I even think of purchasing the next release. I just hope that doesn't extend past the rebate time. Just looking at their tech support board SPP is not the only product they produce that seems to have problems. I think people that purchased the first release should be given at least a 50% discount or even more. Sierra knew they were releasing a horribly defective product and after stealing millions from their customers, want them to finance another potential software scam. Now that I think about it, they will not get another dime from me. I hope the money they got from me and the thousands of others was enough to fund their retirement plans. Like Shakespeare said "He who steals my purse steals trash." I think I'll just wait for the next MSFS or Fly!. July 29, 1998 Editors: I am amazed that Sierra have the cheek to trumpet this new application without any reference to the initial product release, namely Pro Pilot 98. Pro Pilot 98 was appaling in every respect. The resolution was from the dark ages and the scenery/graphics so bad that it was close to impossible to know what on earth was happening outside the cockpit. I could never tell what was runway, terrain, airport or anything as it all skewed together like a drunken painters pallete. Pro Pilot should never have been released and to do so was a cynical attempt to claw back development revenue in the vain hope no one would notice a 'pigs ear' when they bought it. Sierra may want to defend their crass commercial judgement with offers of rebate's BUT only a complete FREE change to the new product will TRULY COMPENSATE.
July 21, 1998 Editors, I will not be purchasing the MS Combat Sim. I have been FSing for eight years, and there are so many things to do with FS98 and add-ons, that I am fully satisfied with MSFS. And, I'm not into combat. If I had been, I probably wouldn't have become such an MSFS fan. I would have been using all the various shoot-em-up sims that are already hogging shelf space in the stores. If I want military action, there are plenty of mititary aircraft and panels to download. I've helped generate and uploaded situation files for carrier landings and launches. I can enjoy the military planes and helos with FS98 without shooting! I think the target audiences are very different for the two products. I have charts, rudder pedals, throttle, and joystick (yoke is next). I've downloaded more planes and wonderful panels than I can use. Using the EFIS add-on, for example, I build and fly simulations of real flights I take almost weekly as a business consultant. And I post them on the 'net so others can share the realism. With the most recent discovery trial of multiplayer FSing over the 'net, there's another whole dimension of FS98. I also own ProPilot and Flight Unlimited II, two great tries in the FS world. I truly hope that none of the MS resources that develop and support FS98 are being used to develop the combat sim, since there's still much to do for the basic MSFS product. Incorporate the engine starts of ProPilot. Add the ATC, weather, and scenery detail from FUII. Add buildings at airports. Improve frame rates by innovative scenery management and caching. I'm told a million copies of FS98 were sold" and be ready to purchase FS99 tomorrow! Perhaps because of the MS combat sim, I'll be purchasing FS2000. That's a loss for all of us! So, let the teenagers and other combat fanatics have fun with such products, but save the serious simming for MSFS and abundant add-ons.
Doug Horton July 17, 1998 Editors, I am excited when a new flight simulator, or a previous versions update is placed on the market. I have been this enthusiastic about this since the first version of Microsoft Flight Simulator. But I only seem to be excited with the so caled, "boring flight simulators where you only get to fly a big airliner around and do absolutly nothing." My hobby in aviation takes directly to civilian airliners. I tend to find that I have a more fun time programming flight paths, calculating fuel stops, and ETA's on these "boring simulators." To get to the point, I myself am going to wait for the official FS2000 to release which which implements some of the newer technology.
Steven Stenstrom Editors, No, I will not buy the MS Combat Sim based on what I've seen of screenshots. In fact I won't buy ANYTHING based on screenshots ever again, thanks to Sierra and their admitted FAKING of the SPP screenshots. No wonder there is piracy. Special Topic Letters: SATCO Pilot Registration
July 2, 1998 Editors: I think the idea for pilot registration is an excellent one and I wholeheartedly support it. One major issue that's being continually vocalized is the urgent need for IFR training. SB pilots desperately want good IFR training, but there are few solid Internet-based resources that they can gain access to to advance their training. What is needed is IFR training centered around MSFS and SB/PC. The Steve's Flight's school has been an excellent resource and perhaps the offerings there could be expanded incorporate heavy-duty IFR training. What I have in mind is the following and is very much like what Steve's site does: Hosted on webpages would be a progressive training system divided into correlated "theory" and "practical" lesson sections. In the theory, one learns the nomeclature, procedures, comm phraseology, explanation of FARs and AIM info, etc. Downloadable maps, charts (in Acrobat say) and related links for more info should be available here. One can download the lesson and complete a quiz at the end of the lesson for one's own benefit. Based on the theory lessons, there could be practical lessons with downloadable adventures where the student can practice what they've learnt so far. Included with the adventures could be text files with "goals" the student should aim for- "complete turns, leveling with a max 1-2 degree deviation from heading", etc. Gradually, as the student progresses to the point of needing practice in the SB environment, students can be instructed to go to specified training areas, file flight plans with special training lesson codes in the remarks section and then do their training under ATC. This way ATC knows what they're doing and can be of assistance if necessary. Eventually the student can complete the lesson system and if he/she likes, take a web-based final exam to gain certification from SATCO or whoever. The lesson system should be simple and enjoyable yet rigorous enough to encourage pilots to seek high standards. With this system, pilots can go at their own pace knowing that certification is the benefit of good training and not a requirement to enjoy SB. In a move to lessen the strain on resources and also introduce students to the SATCO system, I would suggest, if possible, practical training be done in different ARTCC sectors. Also a page or so of "for additional reading" training tips and articles related to specific lessons could be hosted by these and other related SB/PC sites. This way students get in the habit of checking out the sector sites for important information wrt to the areas they will be flying. Getting this sort of lesson system up would be a major undertaking. However it would afford all of us more enjoyable and more _productive_ SB sessions. Ruimaasha Maasha July 1, 1998 Editors: As a real world private pilot SEL, my feeling is that most of the people I have come in contact with through PC/SB are from novice to professional flyers with differing ability levels. However, one commonality that each possess is a desire to enjoy the PC/SB experience to its fullest. This can be quantified in several ways, but I feel that each would like it to be "as real as it can be." If we were not in search of realism, why would we bother with the experience at all? You could just turn on MSFS and fly around in your own world, but participating in an experience such as that offered through PC/SB brings MSFS to a level of realism unmatched by anything else I have ever seen. Personally speaking, participating like I have as a PC controller, has given me a fresh perspective towards the aviation environment and has rekindled and enriched my views on real world aviation. I had actually stop flying for about a year and then one day came across PC/SB and now I have made up my mind to pursue my IFR ticket. Before I thought I could do without it. Now I know why I should have it. I can still remember my flight instructor telling the our ground school class one evening that I was the only student he ever taught that had his IFR ticket before being a private pilot yet. First and foremost we want to have fun, but fun without some challenge and discipline will fade. Let us therefore make each pilot that wishes to participate in the experience afforded by those dedicated to controlling our virtual airspace conduct themselves as we must in the real world, by FAA FARs. SATCO insists that we controllers follow FAA guidelines, so should the pilots that move across our radar screens. I for one am a newbie controller and will be the first to admit I have a lot to learn, but when I'm at the scope of FTW_CTR ARTCC I take it very seriously, but also have fun and go the extra mile, (pardon the pun) to help pilots enjoy their experience too. If the only reason pilots show up on our screens are because they want to fly with real world weather, perhaps we can accommodate them with a lesser vehicle, thus not overloading the network servers with non-participating screen clutter. I also feel very strongly about being able to see each other in the airport environment. The lack of activity at the airport does disappoint me somewhat and thus having everyone utilize multiplayer is a must. As for flying, this is of lesser importance, for if we controllers are doing our jobs pilots would have few aircraft to look at anyway while airborne. I have flown most all real world airspace except Class "A", and have never met an aviator that regretted having ATC there to guide their way. We all enjoy the fun and professionalism involved. I'm not sure what you mean by an alternative system, but I'm open to whatever you wish to do. I do like the pilot training system idea. Scott Menard June 30, 1998 Editors: I have absolutely no objection to registering. Editors: I totally applaude SATCO's move on registration. I'll be one of the first ones to the site! Registration is a process of inclusion, not exclusion. It allows SATCO to manage the flurry of new pilots, and keeps everyone honest about their behavior - and I don' t think it will slow new pilot starts (like a certification would). I think it will make the pilots entering more familiar with the responsibility they take on. I also hope SATCO uses the registration process as an opportunity to 'touch' each new pilot with available training programs, information, and brief tutorials to make new pilots into good pilots. I've suggested such in the forums. This new hobby is preparing for exponential growth - and AVSIM is an important part of that growth and sense of community for simmers. Let's do everything we can to use this 'community' to encourage participation and advancement in the hobby, including supporting SATCO's registration process, providing training, and giving new pilots an immediate welcome to this great Hobby. Ok, too many words now...... Keep up the great work at AVSIM
June 30, 1998 Editors: I'm a relative newcomer (one year) to simming. Once I found Mike's site I knew the this was the mother load All the files I could possibly need were there! I often silently praised Mike's dedication to this great hobby, and wondered how much time he must spend with his page. A time comes when hard choices must be made and I'm sure Mike has made the correct decision for himself. The loss of his efforts will be sadly missed, and I would like to thank Mike for escalating my enjoyment of simming. June 26, 1998 Editors: I think that we lost a great service to the flightsim community. Nevertheless, I think that at the moment, there were many quality uploads which were going to FlightSim.Com and not to IUP. Also, FlightSim Com is more user friendly, especially when looking for old files (IMHO), and with the thumbnails and more thorough descriptions, it has become choice for many. With IUP no longer being the essential site, I think Mike decided it was no longer worth his extra time. Pity, though, because competition keeps sites improving and improves quality, and there is room for several flightsim sites. June 21, 1998 Dear Sirs: I, like many regret the loss of Mike Marando's page. I did notice that the IUP site was getting worse and worse, but all the same, I also think that by its nature, information resources on the Internet are dynamic and must evolve, change and be modifiable; otherwise we would be still in the days of our trustworthy Apple computers. However, what ahould be done about MM's page? I, for one, am at a loss, maybe we all took Mike's page for granted for so long that no one thought it would ever stop? Maybe what we ought to do is to organize a similar service to the sim community ourselves and not be always expect that someone else will take care of our needs. Just some thoughts. Hope they will be useful. June 21, 1998 Editors: Mike's contribution to our hobby was invaluable and one can understand and appreciate the dedication (and at times frustration) of publishing this information. Hats off and a rousing hip-hip-hooray to Tom Allensworth and AVSIM for choosing to pick up where Mike left off. To lose such a resource would have been a tragedy for the flight sim community. Gonna miss you, Mike...but we understand. June 20, 1998 Editors: Thanks for publishing the well-deserved praise for Mike Marando's work. Among flight sim hobbyists he has exemplified the generous spirit of fun that should be associated with this hobby. Mike's work was refreshingly free of the college sophomore level debates and feuds that mar so much of the on-line sim world. And it is a relief to see that at least for the time being AVSIM will step in keep the IUP listings coming to those of us who don't have patience to do battle with the real thing at IUP. June 20, 1998 Editors: I'm feeling bad with the removal of Marando's IUP file listings. I guess you should think about millions, not thousands, of simmers around the world because this is really the most popular simming site on the net. June 19, 1998 Sirs: I also want to register my sadness about Mike Marando's closure of his site. What AVSIM wrote in their editorial is perfect, just a very precise description of his awesome contribution. I would also like to add that he helped me a lot when I had trouble two years ago with the imcompatibility of the video card with FS 5.0. Nobody from Microsoft's site helped me, nor could I find help at many well-known flightsimming sites (I better not name them). Mike immediately responded with a very simple solution. Thanks a lot, Mike I hope that a solution will come out... Janusz Zaporski June 19, 1998 Editors: All I can say is, "Thank God for FlightSim.Com!" Rick Frerichs July 18, 1998 Editors, I spent some time looking at Letters to the Editor and the (heh heh) Forums. The first thing that struck me is how similar AVSIM is to that young Lt. in Good Morning, Viet Nam. The one that insisted the troups needed polka music. The one convinced he could be humorous. If anything remotely different or threatening surfaced, he would attempt to squash it. That av history forum is about as close as you can get to polka music, folks. Take a good look at all the forums. There are sure a lot of them again, but nothing is going on in them. When it does, Lt. Tom squashes it. Look at the Letters to the Editor. There hasn't been a post since July 2nd. Either everyone is afraid to say something substantive, or AVSIM has finally intimidated anyone with an opinion. The Sierra forum example no doubt had a chilling effect. Anyway, this is the first time in a long time that I have gone beyond the first page. I'm not sure why I bothered. I notice the 4CD spam kings didn't miss a beat getting their banner up. June 7, 1998 Hello, Well, a 30 Day MONEY BACK Guarantee, I think we all have heard this before. The [Fly!] sim screen shots LOOK OUTSTANDING but so did Pro Pilot, which I purchased and right now is laying with the PILE of JUNK Sims. I just hope they allow outside BETA testers. And they do not rush the project just to get it out. What really irks me is why don't they wait until it's almost ready to release, before announcing to the public? They know us simmaholics -- when we see a new sim advertised, WE WANT IT NOW. Just my 2 cents. May 30, 1998 Editor: I believe that product ads from companies that make products related to aviation simulation would be of value to Avsim readers. Banners do not necessarily have to be obnoxious in terms of design. If an improved revenue stream will fuel future growth, so much the better. Charles Fleming May 25, 1998
To Whom It May Concern: I've been at the flight simming hobby for a couple of months now. Since taking to the virtual skies, I've learned a little each day and probably haven't spent the time necessary to master what others make a living at (read . . . part time flying enthusiast). As such, I'm easily frustrated at the progress I've made. I've purchased Jeppesen charts and have done a half a#%ed job of learning the basics. My point being text book training and practicing on your own only goes so far. All right, enough of the tiny violin playing. I've noticed recently that SATCO has sponsored controller lessons via IRC and ProController. Great method for teaching . . . the interaction and feedback are must be awesome. More to my point :) (suggestion?) regarding pilot training (the other side of the coin):
Well, I'll get off my soap box, I'm running out of breath and I'm rambling. At the least, I wanted to spark some conversation regarding these thoughts. Is anyone interested in a Virtual Pilot Professional Organization? Your thoughts? |