2002 - Question about default Baron virtual cabin....

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Recently had a glance at this yesterday on a system with the 2k2 pro Baron..... Somewhat curious... I had a few minutes to try the Baron myself, and I found when using Ctrl/Enter to move back through the virtual cabin, the cabin just "ended" just past the trailing edge of the wing.... Has anyone else noticed this? Don't see too many folks talking about the default Baron, but it sure looks nice... Had just a few moments to fly it...seemed a bit slow, but that could be easily tweaked... Meanwhile, back to my DL of the A340-600!-John

[Guest]

That is just how the virtual cabin is designed. It is the same for the Cessnas I believe.

[Guest]

For some reason Microsoft couldn't be bothered to put in the sort of detail that has gone into some of the freeware & payware aircraft that are available !!! Nice of them isn't it !!

[Guest Sabadin]

It's the same for all the VC's. Nothing is modeled that you cant see from the default view point. Although I still dont understand why they didnt put the cowlings for the Cessna.

[LAdamson 240]

>>For some reason Microsoft couldn't be bothered to put in the >sort of detail that has gone into some of the freeware & >payware aircraft that are available !!! Nice of them isn't >it !! Geeze---------For some reason Microsoft had to deal with creating the rest of the world complete with as many data-bases as possible! Do you really expect MS to do it all? Do you see any of the freeware/payware people creating new sims to outdo FS2002?? L.Adamson

[John_Cillis 2,406]

"Do you really expect MS to do it all?"Actually, it looked like the Baron was rather nice anyway, despite where the virtual cabin ended. From the pilot's seat, you really can't tell.... I found the left and right wing views quite good..."For some reason Microsoft had to deal with creating the rest of the world..."And you have to admit, I've helped freeware scenery designers fix the few parts they didn't finish by writing my proggie Landclass Assistant...Coming out of a great weekend of FS2002 flying.... Logged about 12 hours, mostly in CA, AZ and Mexico...-John

[LAdamson 240]

>Coming out of a great weekend of FS2002 flying.... Logged >about 12 hours, mostly in CA, AZ and Mexico... >Did some nice CA flying myself today........... but played "traitor" & tried some new FLYII scenery :) Actually was fun, since I have not enjoyed FLYII much in the past!SoCal FLYII scenery:http://ftp.avsim.com/dcforum/User_files/3d4455a75de87d06.jpgBTW---- hope no one minds me posting this pic here. I'm famous (and hated) for plastering FS2002 pics on the FLY forum!! :)

[John_Cillis 2,406]

Nice pic...no problem seeing it here, since it's my thread and I love any screenshots you take. Here's some shots I took of the Baron...I love sunset shots, and the way the shadows and light play against each other. Sorry about the quality--I shrank them to 640x480 since I have a dial-up connection.

[LAdamson 240]

Took a Baron pic a few days ago myself...

[Guest]

I don't really think it is unreasonable to expect Microsoft to make a "complete" model rather than doing the minimum they can get away with. I certainly see both freeware & payware people making models that are much better than those included in the sim - yet they are not going to get nearly the same customer base as FS2002.Don't get me wrong I like the Baron & FS2002, I just think it is "shoddy" that they didn't actually "complete" the aircraft. How long do you think it would have actually taken for the designers ??I don't see the relevance of the comment about the databases ...

[LAdamson 240]

>>I don't really think it is unreasonable to expect Microsoft >to make a "complete" model rather than doing the minimum >they can get away with. You're so off base....Where did the G-max models with reflective surfaces come from? How about the VC's with working gauges? Or the highly improved prop-arcs from virtual view? As to how long it's taking designers, it's getting into the thousands of hours!! Your comments make little sense to me, as you can't seem to comprehend the whole picture!L.Adamson

[Guest]

Sorry, perhaps I made the point badly, when I said "the minimum they could get away with" I was refering to the fact that they only modeled what you could see from the "default" viewpoint. If you move the viewpoint then you can see the model has not been completed.