An airport a day keeps FSX away

[Guest tpower]

Hi all,first thanks for some recent help (you know who you are). Given I am revisiting and reinvigorated with FS9, I've restarted an old project. First: download an airport (freeware, I'm stingy) of interest. The next day or so, download one nearby and construct some flights. And so on.... For me this expands my vocabulary and georaphy and sets up a nice canvass on which to paint later. EX: I started at Columbus, GA (hometown), went down to Florida and ended up after a few months at Simon Bolivar in Venezuela. With about 60 airports in between! Now, I'm building a North Sea chain, from the Channel Islands north.... and the why not .... south. That's just the way I do it, and I'm having a lot of fun. Beats flying the same old rut. I hope that's helpful to someone, and chime in if you too have any sequences of freeware airports for us (me) to try,Best wishes,Tosh;-)

[Guest FxF3]

Wow reading your post brought back the days when I went to a high school called Baker High in Columbus. I think the mascot was the Lions. I was an Army Brat.

[Guest tpower]

I teach at Baker High.Cheers,Tosh

[Dillon 2,197]

"An airport a day keeps FSX away"I look through the new files list everyday and it's interesting nothing of any real substance is being developed for FSX. Every other version that came out in the past had freeware add-ons gallor weeks after release. FSX is not in the same boat. Most freeware guys are still developing for FS9. That tells the story more than anything about FSX (I don't care what they say in the other forum).We've never had a version of FS released with the SDK's included. Even though this is a first for FSX is making absolutuly no difference in developers desire to work with it. Yes we have a little mesh here and there and a few repaints of the default aircraft but nothing like we've seen in the past. FS9 still rules for most people. FS9 may vary well be that classic version that most serious simmers stay with (the 2D crowd will almost have to if they want 2D sides views in the cockpit)... My performance with FS9 and add-ons included is outstanding. Until that's possible with FSX well, you know the rest... :-)

[bkeske 0]

>Hi all,>first thanks for some recent help (you know who you are). >Given I am revisiting and reinvigorated with FS9, I've>restarted an old project. First: download an airport>(freeware, I'm stingy) of interest. The next day or so,>download one nearby and construct some flights. And so on....This is exacty how I most often fly. Rarely do I spend a tremedous amount of time in my local area/state.I get a rough plan to fly where I have not before (or not for a long time), start my investigation, get all the charts I need, and 'head out', always starting where I last landed. Along the way I'll do a hunt for various freeware sceneries, and have built up quite a nice collection this way: Norway & Finland may be my most complete freeware add-on area to date as there is such quality freeware products availiable.Right now I've just finished a trans-Atlantic flight from Cleveland, to Canada (Goose Bay was my 'jumping over point') to Greenland, to Iceland, to the Faeroe Islands, to the upper tip of Scotland. Thus far Greenland was fairly sparse for stuff availiable, there was quite a few sceneries and mesh availiable for Icland, and there was a nice freeware airport scnery for Varga in the Faeroe Islands. The UK is a bit tougher to find an abundance of freeware scenery, but with my UT Europe, GE Pro, and FSGenesis mesh, plus a few AFCAD's it isn't too bad thus far.France, Spain, and Portugal in the coming months ;)

[Guest pilotbrian0]

My flight style:Take airport I most recently landed at. Find another NON-COMMERCIAL airport within 150 miles. GO there.Occasionally I'll pull out my heavies (744, 742, C130, and Concorde) but when I am on FS, I AM FLYING not riding.-Brian

[Guest thedoggg]

Liking FSX more and more especially for bush flying away from fps robbing cities. Still I love my FS9 and fly it more of the time with heavy aircraft for my virtual airlines and with Fspassengers.Still buying stuff for it too. Just got the UK2000 Glasgow extreme and it is fantastic. Love landing my level D in a detailed airport full of ai 30fps avg which is not something you can do with FSX. I did a flight into Miami in the default FSX 747 and on final approach 10fps. Just doesn't cut it. Very good for flying my Carenados somwhere out in mountainous areas in the middle of nowhwere though. Regards, Carlos

[Guest Eek]

>"An airport a day keeps FSX away">>I look through the new files list everyday and it's>interesting nothing of any real substance is being developed>for FSX. Every other version that came out in the past had>freeware add-ons gallor weeks after release. FSX is not in the>same boat. Most freeware guys are still developing for FS9. >That tells the story more than anything about FSX (I don't>care what they say in the other forum).>>We've never had a version of FS released with the SDK's>included. Even though this is a first for FSX is making>absolutuly no difference in developers desire to work with it.> Yes we have a little mesh here and there and a few repaints>of the default aircraft but nothing like we've seen in the>past. FS9 still rules for most people. >>FS9 may vary well be that classic version that most serious>simmers stay with (the 2D crowd will almost have to if they>want 2D sides views in the cockpit)... My performance with>FS9 and add-ons included is outstanding. Until that's>possible with FSX well, you know the rest... :-)I agree. I think the devlopers realize that many simmers are remaining "Niners". Even the ones who have made the jump to X are either shelving it, or running it eats too many resources to even think about add-ons. No point in having add-ons if you have to gut the sim to make it run.There's still plenty of room in my FS9 folder for add-on goodies. To this point, I've barely scratched the surface, really. All of my add-on dollars will be going for FS9 versions. Keep 'em coming, developers!:-jumpy ~EwingKATLMSI K8N Neo2 PlatinumAMD Athlon 64 3200+ 2.0 GHz2GB Corsair PC-3200 512x4 Dual Channel CL2.5 DDR DIMM eVGA nVIDIA GeForce 6800 GT 256MB DDR3Sound Blaster Audigy LSOCZ Powerstream 420WWinXPPro (SP1)

[graemeb 14]

I fully agree Dillon! I have installed FSX but it has nothing like the Wow! factor that FS9 had over FS2002. (Where did all those brown deserts come from!). After a week I realised that I had spent more time tweaking FSX than actually flying it - arghhh!I will be flying my many dozens of excellent FS9 addon planes into my hundreds of excellent FS9 addon airports for a long time yet. :-)

[Max Kraus 338]

I really have to laugh at all the "hard core" people here over on the FSX forum who are having kittens and seem to think that FS9 is now some radioactive disaster to steer well clear of, banished to "classic" status, they speak about "back in the days of FS9" (which was only a month ago). This really cracks me up. Granted, I think tinkering is a huge part of simming, and I've done lots of it myself - and FSX has got tinkering potential written all over it..... ...But last night I flew from Hanoi to Bangkok in the PMDG 747 with TrackIR and FS2Crew over GEPro at dusk into a nice freeware, stutter free airport, overflowing with AI and thought... this is what it's all about folks.Choose what you want to enjoy, and enjoy it. And don't be a sheep.

[Guest Rob Hirst]

That's the way I tend to fly too. Short hops linking in one long chain.BTW, I have just upgraded from FS2002 to FSX courtesy of the missus buying me the new "game". I am having terrible trouble with FPS etc and have indeed spent more time tweeking than flying. So annoyed with it that I have just bid on ebay for FS9 to fill the gap between the two!!!

[Guest thedoggg]

I agree with you Max. Too many people have uninstalled FS9 and for what. FSX will be a great sim and shows signs of that as it is pretty good already but it has many shortcomings especially with todays hardware. It actually can be frustrating I mean here I am at 35000 feet getting 50-60 fps despite some heavy cumulus clouds in the distance and the sim is looking stunning then I am approaching KMIA mind you it looks nowhere near as nice as Fly Tampas and has from what I can see two AI planes parked (World Travel and Orbit) and 8-10 fps with stutters all over the place while trying to follow the ILS into runway 9. The same Scenario in FS9/Fly Tampa I get at least 20fps in the queen with maybe 50 or more AI planes all around. Oh it may go down to 15 when taxiing to the gate but never into single digits. I am not putting down this sim it is great when bush flying or in and out of smaller airports and Helo flying but just not there yet in regards to flying from one big city to another in an airliner not even a default one. In the meantime I have all these fantastic add ons for FS9 and why shouldn't I continue to enjoy them. I can fly either sim whenever I feel the need to. What's the point in uninstalling FS9 except some kind of ego thing or superiority complex. What is this myth that you have to remove previous versions and move on to the latest and greatest? I actually still have FS2002 installed as well with a few planes that are dear to me and were not updated to FS9 (most notably the Dreamfleet 737-400) and I may give it a spin once in a blue moon if I feel the need too. I have no shame in doing this. Long live FS8,FS9, and FSX. Enjoy them all.Carlos

[LAdamson 240]

>I fully agree Dillon! I have installed FSX but it has nothing>like the Wow! factor that FS9 had over FS2002. (Where did all>those brown deserts come from!). After a week I realised that>I had spent more time tweaking FSX than actually flying it ->arghhh!>Wow!This is just like X-Plane versus MSFS.....Only MSFX verus MSFS!Except after near two decades of flight simming, I'm still getting enough WOW out of a non tweaked FSX to treat it as a stand alone simulator. Yes FSX has those ugly brown deserts, and FS9 has those miserable low resolution city textures sprinkled with cartoon auto-gen subdivisions. Yes sir, the FSX brown deserts are a turn off! But after seeing some high resolution capabilities of FSX; now everytime I fire up FS9 for a great looking airport with lots of AI, I'm met with those miserable looking low resolution surrounding city textures sprinkled with cartoon auto-gen on my climbout or approach! I suppose if I just stick to instruments and don't look out, then everything will be fine! :7 No doubt in my mind, that it's a trade off. I'll just use FS9, X-Plane, and FSX as stand alone simulators.BTW, I'm still trying to think of the "WOW" factor of FS9 over FS2002. The water improved a bit, the auto-gen improved some, and the flight dynamics kind of went backwards, which required a lot of re-work by third party authors; and the dynamics of FS9 still are not up to FS2002. Reaction of tail surfaces on the takeoff roll are a good example.Nope, I think I'm getting more WOW out of FSX. A much better feel of flight in the changing airmass, which is appreciated by pilots, as well as the crisp defined photo-like textures to look at below.L.Adamson

[LAdamson 240]

>I really have to laugh at all the "hard core" people here>over on the FSX forum who are having kittens and seem to think>that FS9 is now some radioactive disaster to steer well clear>of, banished to "classic" status, they speak about "back in>the days of FS9" (which was only a month ago). This really>cracks me up. >:D Even If I give a few people a bad time for chopping down FSX, I'm still loading up addons to FS9 on my newer CPU. No plans to banish it. I just treat my three major flight simulations as stand alones, for whatever suits the occasion best.L.Adamson

[Guest 727Fan]

I've been reading comments regarding FSX's lack of pizazz in the graphics and textures area.Is it my imagination, or isn't FSX designed primarily for Direct X 10?I've read where Direct X 10 is supposed to really make FSX jump.But then I could be wrong. I'm not buying it until Direct X 10 is available.Rick