Sign in to follow this  
Guest

The Changing face of flight simming

Recommended Posts

We talked before about whether freeware was slowly dying as we used to know it.We talked about the complexity of developing complete aircraft was so labour intensive and required such specialist skills in unique areas that the lone aircraft developer was becoming a thing of the past.We talked about peoples expectations now being so high that maybe this was partly the reason for freeware developers becoming justifiably angry at the demands placed on them and criticism of their work.http://www.fsavionics.comReplicating the Garmin 430/530 and Avidyne systems.These units are availble on the Seneca five I fly.I wonder now whether not only freeware but Commercial developers are going to be pushed to the limit.Commercial developers are themselves going to have to approach specialists to sub contract units like these into their panels and add those costs into the final aircraft selling cost.I could see the point at which not only will the complete aircraft be made by one company but by a number of specialist companies, especially as we demand more and more real avionics displays.Naturally commercial addon aircraft will be more costly, more sophisticated and users will be more demanding than ever and less tolerant of the poor lone freeware developer.Am I reading this trend wroung???Peter(picture is the Seneca five N145DR at FL 190 with the Garmin 430/530 the Avidyne is out of the picture to the right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Sigh, maybe you are right Peter. Still I enjoy the increasing realism but don't have the time to learn all these fancy gadgets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly the same idea popped into my head while looking at the virtual Garmin.You can look at it as the sign of a game becoming more and more of a training tool (concept perceptible in MS "Pro" version).Could also be due to a global quantitative increase of the market, although I have no idea whether this market is growing or of how big it is.On the other hand, look at Frolov's Dash: it was made by a free developer, with professional training in mind, and given to us as freeware, in part as a beta-testing strategy...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ShrinkI use the Garmin 530/430/ Avidyne and have also got the training device from Garmin on my computer which came with the aircraft when the owner purchased it.There were many features missing from the real unit on the Garmin training cds and it was useful for basic procedures.The makers of the FS2002 units claim 80% accuracy to the real thing and to purchase all the units for F2002 is expensive.I can see that the demand in the future will be for 100% accurate nav equiptment.Where would that leave the commercial aircraft developers who will have to block purhase units to complete their aircraft or leave holes in the panel should someone want to add them seperately.But where would this leave the poor guy who builds planes for his enjoyement and already cant keep up with the level of VC and interior detail supplied by commercial outlets, not to mention the demands on flight models which can only be really well done by about five flight modellers worldwide.We are already seeing the effects of user expectations by the past rows concerning freeware and the fact that many will only have complete aircraft of very high standard residant on their systems.In the earlier days of FS you downloaded whatever caught your fancy as most were pretty well a much of a muchness.Its not the cream of the freeware developers who might take a year perfecting a select aircraft. They can be counted on two hands? but the mass of people who like to make nice looking and detailed exterior models.Maybe Im way off markPeter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter,I think you are correct in your assessment: developing for flight sims IS becoming more and more complex. As more powerful systems are capable of delivering more realism, so will the demand for realism rise. Which means an increasing need for specialised developers contributing their knowledge to dedicated teams working together on highly complex projects, which take more time to complete. The time, effort, knowledge and documentation needed won't come for free anymore. I do think we're seeing the end of complex and realistic freeware aircraft.I don't think this is a negative evolution: I'd rather have 3 very realistic payware aircraft in my hanger than 300 'generic' freeware a/c which only *look* different but don't behave like the real thing and are all operated in the same simplified way. But that's just MY taste. But because there are a lot of simmers with different tastes than mine, this does not spell the end of freeware. There will always be 'would-be' pilots who have no ambition to go all the way. They just want to have fun and don't want to dig into all the intricacies of flying. For them a simple plane which approximates reality in a more or less beleivable manner will suffise. Nothing wrong with that.Another area where there's still plenty of room for freeware developers is airport scenery. Creating an airport is relatively simple compared to developing an aircraft. It can easily be done with fairly humble means and widely available documentation. And it is within the scope of what a single individual -with a little bit of help from his friends- can accomplish. Do we need an airport which is recreated to the last detail? Absolutely not. If I can land at an airfield where the 'airside' scenery gives me a good idea of what the real thing looks like, I'm more than happy. I'm not going to slew through the airport for hours and hours to explore every nook and cranny, not even at my 'home' airport. I think the need for 'perfection' (perfection always comes at a cost) here is not so great. I'd rather have 300 airports which are a fair representation of reality (and only the parts which I can see from my aircraft)than a few superb sceneries which recreate every building, inside and out and from all sides.I do recognise however that recreating even a moderate sized airport takes months of works, I'm not at all dismissing the outstanding work many freeware scenery designers have delivered and I'm very grateful for their input. In fact, I spent hundreds of hours myself in creating a scenery for Fly. But I did it for the fun of it. Creating a scenery was just as much part of the hobby as flying. And this will always be true for many others who like the creative part of it, and who think the praise of fellow-simmers is payment enough.There's another aspect of the 'commercialisation' of flight simming which bothers me more. Lately there have been offerings of airport sceneries where they ask 15, 20 euros or more for just one airport. Other commercial packages charge the same for at least 5, 6 airports and they even throw in some airplanes: five times more value for the same amount of money. If the market was really at work here, those overpriced products wouldn't stand a chance. But I'm afraid we simmers are very 'easy' consumers. We want it all and we want to pay the price for it. Now to me it looks like anyone can charge anything he wants, there will always be enough people who are willing to pay those exorbitant prices. If this wasn't the case, by now the market would have reached some kind of 'agreement' on what a fair price would be. Instead we see all kinds of prices which are by no means representative for what's on offer. And when you see those greedy developers getting away with it, you can be sure others will follow and prices will soar.Pretty soon only higly paid real pilots will be the only ones who can afford flight simming.Paul

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter,it is oneof the questions I will ask the audience at the FS weekend tomorrow and Sunday. As I have in the past.I think you have a point to a certain extent. I believe there are two very distinct groups of users in the flightsim community.... actually, there are a lot OUTSIDE of the community. The groups I mean are the regular flyers and usually stickers for realism, in different areas I might add, and the 'occasional' user.Judging from my contacts in this world I would say that the vast majority is still in the second group, and most of them do not have a clue about internet sites for FS, about downloading files and about installing add-ons, let alone be worried about the to be or not to be of freeware :-)So your question pertains to the regulars. And of them yet another precentage is not too worried by this trend in expanding realism. Many people still have never bought an add-on, especially not such complicated ones as the Avidyne, Garmin, RealXP and other avionics. So, I think there is still, and will be for a long time to come, a 'market' for freeware add-ons, information and exchange. Yes, the sophisticated users will want more and more, and hence those products will have to be more expensive. The answer of course is modularity, as in real life. A real aircraft, just like a car, comes in a basic configuration as far as interior and avionics are concerned, and the buyer adds bits and pieces according to his use and wallet.I imagine that is what will happen in our simualted world too... and already is to some extent.Yes, we probably will see aircraft builders (and scenery builders too) team up to collect different skills needed to produce high quality add-ons. And payware and freeware builders alike might start making provisions to add IN modules that can be bought seperately. Why not? Would that be bad?In the end the hobby is already getting more expensive for those of us that want more realism, which in my view is only logical. If you want a higher resolution digicam, or a bigger tv with more features, you'll pay more money too.... let's not even start about PC's !! :-lol :-lol :-outta Francois :-wave________________________Francois A. "Navman" DumasAssociate Editor &Forums AdministratorAVSIM Online!email: fdumas@avsim.com________________________

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right on-but that is progress!20 years ago I programed (even in machine language-what is that?) small programs that were even useful-my business used one at the time.The difference of what you could buy then, and what I could do as a hobbiest were often not that different-both in function and quality.When groups of teams of programers started being used on commercial products I quickly realized my time was over. Of course, software products quality also took a big rise up so I wasn't disturbed at all.The loss of a hobbiest programmert was made up by the bargain-a program that although fun would take me months to write vs. the same program executed 100 fold in quality and features by a software team for $40-much more of a bargain! Instead of being disturbed at the loss of my hobby I just took up a different one (flight simming :-lol ) and realized the programming end was better left to the pros.I would much rather myself pay for this higher quality-you get what you pay for-and an aircraft such as you guys have made does now take a team and thousands of hours.Yes , perhaps fs freeware in the future will possibly be relegated to repaints and small utilities MS doesn't include-but that is the price of progress.On the other hand-the increased realism that will be payware and probably should be, is not really a problem-you don't have to buy it and I suspect it caters to a relatively small market anyway. But to the people who need or require this increased reality it is actually a blessing!I have been waiting for years for realistic avionics-this is the first year we have started getting some finally. Yes-most are payware and considering their complexity they should be. But-for instance-for the cost of 1/2 hour of flying a real bird the reality xp radio/gps stack (which copies the apollo real world series) has probably saved me literally 100's of dollars in wasted training time in the air that I can now do on the ground. That's a bargain-and I doubt a freeware developer would have ever been able to pull it off.Something to be said for that.http://members.telocity.com/~geof43/Geofdog2.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're totally right. FS is becoming more of a "world/life simulator" than a game. I shudder to think how real this is going to be even 5 or 10 years from now when we have video cards that can make it look like film footage.The sub-contracting idea has already started happening - Dreamfleet and Flight1 are a good example - Nick Jacobs from DF programmed the Flight1 Cessna 421's GPS...Personally, I have absolutely no problem with any talented FS design team charging for their products - the amount of time and knowledge that goes into making some of these crazy new aircraft like the RealAir SF.260 or the Dreamfleet Cardinal is just staggering. IMO, it'd be a crime if they released that stuff for free - it's getting to the point where these are almost real freaking airplanes for cryin out loud!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FrancoisI agree with what both you and Paul are saying.I remember in the days of FS95 there were many aircraft released daily as freeware, all much of a muchness and I would download and install aircraft which appealed to me.Now complete aircraft releases are far less with a large increase in repaints.Freeware is much more strongly defended by the community and criticism by a far more reality demanding user less tolerated than it used to be.Maybe this is a reflection of fear amongst the community trying to maintain a dwindling freeware sector.I also agree that the cost of adding all the commercial addons whether aircraft or scenery is making the hobby very expensive.It would be interesting to know how much people have spent on addons to the basic FS2002 since its release. Im sure the answer for soem would be frightening.By the time we reach FS2004 the cost of inhabiting the FS world will be horrendous if users want to have a top notch FS.Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AddendumFrancoisThis brings me to another point which I feel will become more and more important........Tools!!! MSFS is a creative medium and to go together with this extra complexity tools to make the job simpler and not requiring people to be Einsteins in every field will surely be needed.I could see a simple flight modelling tool which allows you to add performance spec into an interface and then also allows you to adjust the feel of every control with sliders from within the sim until an airfile is automatically created.I could see simular creative tools for making panels and VCs.Airports from a huge database of buildings taxiways etc which are simply drag and drop.The list could go on :-)Then and only then will freeware take up its old positionPeter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, Peter, but then again the tools makers become more and more professional now too these days, because FS becomes more complicated all the time :-( (Look at the major tools like FSMeteo, FSNavigator, LAGO's many new entries etc.).I don't think we will see a freeware world as we once had it.... but you never know.We used to have a 'free' CP/M world one day.... that disappeared and it took a very long time for something like Linux to show up ;-)Kind regards,Francois :-outta Francois :-wave[table border=0 cellpadding=10 cellspacing=0][tr][td valign=bottom" align="center]"At home in the wild"[/td][td valign=bottom" align="center][link:avsim.com/alaska/alaska_052.htm|Don's Alaskan Bush Charters]"Beavers Lead the Way"[/td][td valign=bottom" align="center][link:www.avsim.com/vfr_center/mainpages/vfr_flights_main_page.htm]VFR Flight Center]"Looking Good Outside"[/td][/tr][tr][td valign=top" align="center]http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/logo75b.gif[/td][td valign="top" align="left" colspan=2]http://www.fssupport.com/images/moose2.gif[/td][tr][/table]________________________Francois A. "Navman" DumasAssociate Editor &Forums AdministratorAVSIM Online![/bemail: fdumas@avsim.com________________________

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good point. Peter's reasoning takes place within a monopoly situation and what he describes could very well be a direct product of this.However, periodically, there are some quantic jumps that sort of change the landscape and reset everything to zero...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter -Very interesting observation, which I'd say is quite accurate. What we may see happen is a bifuration of user groups. That is, there may be those that use FS20xx as a game, who will certainly not need or want such intense level of realism. While, on the other hand, there may be a separate and distinct group that uses FS20xx as a real world training aid that could support an "intense-realism" industry.Currently, it seems that the general impression among the typical real world pilot is that simulators are games, for kids. That being based on the simulators of the past. It has only been more recently that we are seeing articles on AVWeb or in piloting magazines about the realism and usefulness of simulators. As this impression shifts and we see more pilots begin using simulators as training aids, this new market is going to want their virtual planes to be equipped with the same avionics they already use or those they are considering purchasing (or, obviously, the ones they wish they could purchase ;-)).Basically, I see that as realism increases, we won't necessarily see a drastic decrease in gamers, but will see a reasonable increase in real world pilots using the software. Hopefully, the increase market size will support the increased addon costs necessary to facilitate such avionics and aircraft development.Regards,http://mywebpages.comcast.net/jsnyder99/sigs/photopiper.jpg | [LINK:www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?photographersearch=Jeffrey%20L.%20Snyder&distinct_entry=true|AIRLINERS.NET PHOTOS] [link:www.biblegateway.com/bgaudio/english/NIV/Max%20McLean/RM/bgaudio.pl?selection=1|AUDIO BIBLE] ] JEFF_S_KDTW@YAHOO.COM[/font

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is the sort of topic that proves the value of avsim and the diversity of participants. Our hobby is large enough to accomodate those who want the absolute in "simulated reality", an oxymoron if there ever was one. On the other hand, there are the more casual flyers who may be a little less demanding. There is at least one area where clashes can occur, and that is during online flying with vatsim. I am not criticizing vatsim, but pointing out the reality that some controllers are very professional and expect the same of the pilots who fly in their sectors. At the same time, when a flyer is asked for charts, and says he or she does not have them, the controller will more often than not provide vectors. So, cooperation is possible on line and off among simmers, of all abilities, no matter their demands. Peter, who started this thread, has done some wonderful things for our hobby, not the least of which are his beautiful real life in flight photos as well as contributions to sim flight. And, Peter, thanks for opening up a most interesting discussion. And, for anyone else who is a developer, if you can figure out how to give us a room module that responds on an x-y axis to the banks and turns of sim flight on our 17 inch screens, and maybe do it for a couple of hundred dollars...that would be an accomplishment...:-)done babblin'sherm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you touch another interesting point there Jeff, that of using FS2002 (and others?) by real pilots (or students) and flight schools. It not only seems to be an increasing thing, but looking at some of the presentations at the AVSIM conference there are already quite a few VERY professional uses for (part of) the software in use for a number of years.I am referring to Boeing using it, and the US Navy among others.There are also quite a few flightschools around that start using PC based simulators nowadays and more sophisticated hardware is popping up all over the place.....That too indicates that there will clearly be a growing divide between very hard core simmers, some even professional, and the large group of occasional users, lets call them 'gamers' ;-) :-outta Francois :-wave[table border=0 cellpadding=10 cellspacing=0][tr][td valign=bottom" align="center]"At home in the wild"[/td][td valign=bottom" align="center][link:avsim.com/alaska/alaska_052.htm|Don's Alaskan Bush Charters]"Beavers Lead the Way"[/td][td valign=bottom" align="center][link:www.avsim.com/vfr_center/mainpages/vfr_flights_main_page.htm]VFR Flight Center]"Looking Good Outside"[/td][/tr][tr][td valign=top" align="center]http://bfu.avsim.net/sigpics/logo75b.gif[/td][td valign="top" align="left" colspan=2]http://www.fssupport.com/images/moose2.gif[/td][tr][/table]________________________Francois A. "Navman" DumasAssociate Editor &Forums AdministratorAVSIM Online![/bemail: fdumas@avsim.com________________________

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too think the death of Freeware is on hand (at least on the short road)... But that doesn't have to be a bad thing. Just as in life, "death" isn't necessarily a bad thing, its really just a transition to another state. In this case, FS addons will become more commercial, but on the flip side also must become:Free Software.Those two words embody so much (useless in my opinion) political meaning these days that I hesitate to use them in this context - but they are the future here if free works are to survive and thrive. The ideals, benefits and negatives behind the methodology are so much more than can be discussed in one post of course (just as Freeware and Commercial methodologies are).But the overriding and all important benefits that it can end up bringing to the "Freeware" market for flight addons is clear: teamwork, organization and compartmentalization. As you all so correctly state, the current and future addons are becoming too complex for all but an extreme few singular developer to tackle - if the project is to take advantage of all complex systems and work that is needed for a "high end" work.Complexity is *not* the death of free works however, as has been proven time and again the past twenty years in the computer industry. Lack of teamwork, organization and compartmentalization is. Some of the most complex and highly technical projects in the software industry today are maintained and thrive under a Free Software banner. Why? Again I'll state it: Teamwork, organization and compartmentalization. The lack of those three aspects in any large manner are what is slowly killing the Freeware market in the FS scene - and will continue to do so at a much more rapid pace as time progresses here. Its simply a fact of software development life as the environment it thrives in matures. Its nothing to be sad about however.As you all state, its simply a matter of time before projects get so large that they can't be handled by even a private group of freeware developers. Once that happens, either they quit completely and focus on less complex aspects of FS, *or*, a set of groups organize and take advantage of the top notch Free Software organization tools (such as medium scale bug trackers, source control tools with organized management frameworks, etc). These are the foundations that are missing today in the mindset of many FS addon developers. With them, complex projects become manageable (and fun!) and competitive again - and thrive if in the right environment. Without them large, complex projects simply become unwieldy for all but the largest of commercial organizations (theres that all important word again). Until some bold group tackles a Free Software project and succeeds by virtue of its benefits, other developers will continue to doubt the viability of such a model (unless they are developers outside of the tiny FS market and have seen the model work before).As Peter points out as well, specific FS specialized Tools are indeed the lacking catalyst to a lot of this. And, unfortunately, a ton of the blame here rests on Microsoft's shoulders. As FS has advanced and progressed in its complexity and realism, the tools used to access this functionality have remained in the stone ages. Literally. So much of FS's innards are based upon arcane foundations laid for it over twenty years ago. But worse, the Tools used to access this functionality has as well. This *can* be handled ok as long as a vendor keeps up with the modernization of the Tools used to access complex or arcane functionality and the vendor takes an active and energetic role in documentation (Microsoft Windows itself is a *PRIME* example here). However, that has not happened in Flight Simulators case beyond a few isolated areas. While tiny steps are taken by Microsoft in each FS release to help developers in small areas, a vast array of functionality is still locked behind a wall of ancient and undocumented interfaces and methodology - and worse, Tools.It may indeed take a whole new flight platform at some point in the future to change all this. Fly! might have been just such a beast (as its inner design was brilliant in almost all end-user-developer areas - if, and understandably, extremely immature), but alas it has withered on the publisher vine. If Microsoft doesn't wake up to this massive problem at some point in their own sim and spend a *lot* more time on developing end-user developer Tools that match the ease of use developers today expect and depend upon, well... I guess the market will decide.Just my two cents,Elrond"A musician without the RIAA, is like a fish without a bicycle."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're dead right. It's already become too hard for the hobby developer to produce a complete model.However I think there is another group of FS users who use the sim in a different way.I'm an aircraft enthusiast who isn't particularly interested in being a pilot. I like aircraft from a designers point of view.The more FS gets to be like watching real video footage, the more interesting it is to me.But I'd be quite happy to have an FS pilot to fly my models for me while I go outside & have a look at the aeroplane.For me, having to deal with piloting can sometimes be a bit of a pain.Why not go to the airport & watch?Well I'm usually interested in aircraft that you can't see flying anymore. Not even on video.As long as I have an outside view, then I've always got the same need for good 3D aircraft models, panel or not.David Maltby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read these boards and tend to do some analysis myself. I also design scenery, and have done so for about 6 years.I think we become biased in our viewpoints by the people that make themselves heard, and we often lose sight of the silent majority. One result of these boards is it provides a new avenue for celebrity. With the element of convenience and annonymity, celebrity is now available in an exciting new form, and perhaps folks that were not in a position for such notice can now FINALLY get their turn.Notice the name recognition and defference shown to highly visible designers, people like Mike Stone and Anniette, and their detractors, the antagonists of the boards. Several times these folks in specific have been offended and 'officially' quit, and then get talked back by adoring fans. Same with Steve Small, Ron Friemuth, and likely others. There is an otherworldliness about this that simply doesn't impact or involve a huge number of people, many folks I know personally continue to design quite happily, and really don't ever receive nearly the level of praise, or the level of discontent that these folks receive. My sense is that these boards have taken on a bit of a soap opera quality, which really transcends the act of design, and enters into more the level of relationships...both positive and negative. another element that bears notice is the number of people who pretend to be involved in a commercial enterprise. The anonymity of these boards reduces the liklihood that such claims will be challenged, one example is a kid named Alex, who has regularly claimed to be CEO of his company, and claimed to be the Vice President of scenery, claims to be "hiring", and yet he doesn't have any more of a company than I had as a kid playing "office". He's really a beginning designer, but enjoys the fantasy. I finally got him to talk to me as Alex, and my sense is he's probably a likeable kid who's having fun. You may think I'm being negative, not so...these fantasies, whether about fame as a superstar, or fame as a CEO appear quite harmless, although the first may drive a person into real life stress levels not to be desired. No, I don't condemn anyone, and having folk hero status does NOT detract from the quality of Mike Stone's work or the work of any of the other folks I named. My only point is that their publicity is not a valid reflection of the condition of 'freeware'. so many times I've read that freeware is dead, which is such a silly statement with the library constantly being added too. What the writer usually means is a name they've grown familier with (one of their "heros") decided to move on. Are there more "heros" being noticed on the internet these days than there was in the days of fsforum on compuserve...perhaps.I can tell you that the hardcore scenery designers commune regularly in scenery design forum. Here at Avsim, the nature of the folks there is pretty serious, people interested in technical design skills, and hero worship is almost non-existant. Certainly mutual respect is real, but not hero worship. We rarely see any of the issues that appear on this board, folks receiving crank emails, or being disrespected, and we also are without the defference and adjulation that you can find on this board. And I doubt anyone that is a regular contributer to the scenery design forum is concerned that freeware scenery design is dying! We never consider dire consequences from bad commercial products...well maybe almost never! It like we're a bit too interested in the techniques that either we or our friends are discovering to bother with that kind of stuff. So, I think worrys about the changing face of things is really more of the pseudo-social-soap opera virtual society that has sprung up amongst folks that are having a lot of fun serving this community of folks as "hero", "badguy", "admirer", "CEO", and lots of other "virtual titles" available to folks that otherwise are working men and women, or school aged people, dreaming and enjoying a measure of fantasy.But actually being concerned about losing freeware scenery and airplanes...not a problem...just watch the library. When we stop having files uploaded, that's when to discuss a problem.With best intentions,Bob BernsteinEdmonds, Wa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob, I think you are so very right in many of your observations. While this current thread involves a serious, informed and worthwhile discussion, there have been so many others that reflect many of the dynamics you've identified above. It's good to be reminded of that by someone with an outsider's perspective. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are correct, no doubt. But that is what the true "simulation experience" is all about! It is just not the software that is progressing to this level, but the hardware too. Trying to get more and more like the real thing in your own home. How many of us, if the price was reasonable would not love to have a full motion simulator. The only question is how far are we as the hobbiest willing to take this- the market will follow what the customer is willing to spend. From all indications, it looks like we are willing to spend plenty for our hobby, when you see all the products currently for sale. To this end, I not only see specialists making different aspects of the planes and the simulator, but we ourselves, as pilots will become specialized. We won't have the time, money or resources to do it all. We will have to decide if we we want to specialize in GA, commuter, Helicopter or Heavy Aircraft simulation and customize our systems and training to maximize the realistic experience for one of those.Welcome to the future of virtual avaition!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Peter! Don't worry. It'll come back. It always does.When one looks at history, a regular precursor of change is a state of stasis, a plateau phase. When Heisenberg was considering becoming a student of physics, he was told by one of the autorities of the time (second half of XIX th century), that physics was a finished field. Maxwell had explained everything, except for a couple of discrepancies...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the end of the world as we know it...and I feel fine.Bring it on. I'm willing to pay the price for quality, full featured aircraft. Nothing less is worth the time download time. Honestly, I'm tired of "freeware culture" and the incessant whining that accompanies it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I'm tired of the "Moghdad culture" and the incessant whining that accompanies it. Your post in this great thread being a prime example.Take care,Elrond"A musician without the RIAA, is like a fish without a bicycle."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that's hitting the old nail right on the head! tools sir, better tools the number of times one has to "re-invent" the weel will hurtour favorate pass time. Even to "do" scenery to the level that peoplenow demand is becoming harder sir as there is NO intergrated editorfor this sim (2002) I an sorry but if a small company like tri can do it the people over in Redmond bloody well can as well. With a truly intergrated editor people can concentrate on the task at handADDING to the core product instead of having to re-invent to above weel. Dan Martin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this