My First Xmas As A Simmer -- Suggestions For Santa?

[JohnE 0]

I agree, check out FTX http://fullterrain.com a true playground for VFR flying plus great support and plenty of freeware airports to go along with it. For AC my favorites are Digital Aviation's Piper Cheyenne, Eaglesoft's Piper Comanche and Flight one's Pilatus PC-12.John

[Guest Mower]

That's BS, I work at Duluth, MN and we constantly have the 148th FW F-16's practicing SFO's, overheads, every kind of maneuver out there, and they aren't loaded. The Aerosoft 16 is on my xmas list... You can do a ton more than combat with it...

BS?I think not.I have been around combat sims for decades.Show me where in FS there is a tactical environment to properly deploy the F-16.Overheads and maneuvers are NOT what the Viper is about...nor ANY combat jet. I do not care where you are no your credentials, you are out of touch.For proper F-16 deployments you need to look here...http://www.lead-pursuit.com/news.htmhttp://www.freefalcon.com/Frankly, on the topic combat flight simming, your knowledge is lacking.

[ryanbatc 12,850]

LOL!!! Since when were we discussing combat sims? I thought the thread was about good xmas suggestions for payware?Just because you can't fire missiles doesn't mean it's not an excellent product. If you want combat stay away from Microsoft Flight Sim X. Get Falcon 4, CFS3, even Jane's ATF if you can find a PC to run it on hah.For FSX, the AS F16 is very well done. They didn't model it to be combat-ready in FSX you know? And yes, I've used all the good combat sims....thank you very much....Back on topic - to the OP, I believe the RealAir SF260 was mentioned but I also recommend the Scout Pack 2007http://www.realairsimulations.com/flash.ph...e=scout07_intro

[JSkorna 137]

Hi,By Christmas we hope to have a new weather program out.Thanks,Jim

[Guest -BeNt-]

Well this is my list of must haves......hard to pick out just a few.Hardware:CH YokeCH Rudder PedalsTrack IRTexture, scenery, terrain:Ultimate Terrain X - all of them!Ground Environment X All the FS Genesis Mesh'sMega Scenery Las Vegas, SoCal, and Hawaii are musts!!Scenery Tech LandclassesFly Tampa HongKong - simply amazingPlanes:AeroSoft Beaver XAeroSoft Twin OtterFlight One PC-12AlphaSim Long EZAny Carenado PlaneEaglesoft Columbia 400Eaglesoft SR22TXHughes H1 Racer --- great planeLevel-D 767PMDG MD-11Anything RealAir especially the scout package.CoolSky Super 80/pro -- I fly this a lot.Helicopters:Anything Nemeth Brothers.I can keep going so much I like......but I would go with hardware first. Get your yoke/pedals/trackir. Then worry about the software.

[sprintz 0]

Mower, why do you go **out of your way** (again) to pop into an unrelated thread to make a point that a certain FSX fighter jet is a "sad joke" just because it doesn't fire weapons? How many times can you miss the point? I could direct you to many posts on various forums where people say they've never had so much fun within MSFS as with that F-16. Is that not worth something? Or are you going to continue to tell those people that the fun they're having is not valid?You've done this same silly thing on other sites too, and you recently implied (in another post here on avsim) that you had been banned from some of them. I'm not sure, but what's the deal? Is it that you're so invested in some kind of online "virtual hotshot" fighter pilot identity that you think any simulation involving something OTHER THAN balls-to-the-wall bomb dropping is for wimps? Are you THAT invested in a make believe image, or that threatened by those who prefer emphasis on other things? You always seem to disappear from these kinds of threads at the point where someone asks you something like this: if the Air Force knocked on your door and said "wanna take an F-16 for a spin?", would you say NO simply because they wouldn't let you drop bombs? I think that question crystallizes how ridiculous your continual rant is. ("I'm Mower and I want everyone to know: Apples are not oranges. I repeat, apples ARE NOT oranges!") We know. They're different. But an apple is not a "sad joke" just because it's not an orange. When your Falcon 4 (and its avionics sim derivatives) can do the things that a true FLIGHT simulation like FSX can do, things much more fundamental to actual flight... or when a MSFS fighter jet is designed and advertised as a substitute for those combat sims, THEN maybe your point will have a place. Until then, your message is obvious, redundant, and most importantly rude and unnecessarily negative. And I personally will write it off as the uninformed opinion of a kid. (Given your M.O., yes, I'm assuming you're a kid.)

Utterly no point flying combat jets in FS when you cannot deploy the weapons nor fight in a tactical environment.That's why the Aerosoft F16 is such a sad joke.For the Spit go with IL2-1946.For the F-16 go with Falcon 4.

[Guest Mower]

Not entirely, none, no, maybe/depends, no, no, no, depends, your assumption is incorrect.Hope that clarifies... :( I NEVER disappear when I am called out.However, nor do I seek ill will nor banning hereabouts so this is my last reply to that.Come over here for a more liberal and free-wheeling debate on the matter.http://forums.frugalsworld.com/vbb/forumdisplay.php?f=47

[simfan1983 185]

Mower, why do you go **out of your way** (again) to pop into an unrelated thread to make a point that a certain FSX fighter jet is a "sad joke" just because it doesn't fire weapons? How many times can you miss the point? I could direct you to many posts on various forums where people say they've never had so much fun within MSFS as with that F-16. Is that not worth something? Or are you going to continue to tell those people that the fun they're having is not valid?You've done this same silly thing on other sites too, and you recently implied (in another post here on avsim) that you had been banned from some of them. I'm not sure, but what's the deal? Is it that you're so invested in some kind of online "virtual hotshot" fighter pilot identity that you think any simulation involving something OTHER THAN balls-to-the-wall bomb dropping is for wimps? Are you THAT invested in a make believe image, or that threatened by those who prefer emphasis on other things? You always seem to disappear from these kinds of threads at the point where someone asks you something like this: if the Air Force knocked on your door and said "wanna take an F-16 for a spin?", would you say NO simply because they wouldn't let you drop bombs? I think that question crystallizes how ridiculous your continual rant is. ("I'm Mower and I want everyone to know: Apples are not oranges. I repeat, apples ARE NOT oranges!") We know. They're different. But an apple is not a "sad joke" just because it's not an orange. When your Falcon 4 (and its avionics sim derivatives) can do the things that a true FLIGHT simulation like FSX can do, things much more fundamental to actual flight... or when a MSFS fighter jet is designed and advertised as a substitute for those combat sims, THEN maybe your point will have a place. Until then, your message is obvious, redundant, and most importantly rude and unnecessarily negative. And I personally will write it off as the uninformed opinion of a kid. (Given your M.O., yes, I'm assuming you're a kid.)

Chill out man, since when is adding a relevant comment to a forum "going out of your way" to pop into an unrelated thread! As for being rude and negative, it wasn't personally directed, unlike your post.The original poster did not specify that the add ons had to be FSX, in fact he said he was new to flight simming. I think suggesting Falcon 4 for a combat aircraft simulation is good advice. I've spent hours on both FSX and Falcon, and they are both excellent but there's no way I would buy a combat jet for FSX. I happen to agree that however good the simulation of the flight model could be in FSX it would miss out in failing to simulate the weapons systems.Have you tried Falcon 4 or Falcon Allied Force? The flight model is surprisingly good and it's a very challenging aircraft to fly well, especially land.Lawrence

[sprintz 0]

Chill out man, since when is adding a relevant comment to a forum "going out of your way" to pop into an unrelated thread! As for being rude and negative, it wasn't personally directed, unlike your post.The original poster did not specify that the add ons had to be FSX, in fact he said he was new to flight simming. I think suggesting Falcon 4 for a combat aircraft simulation is good advice. I've spent hours on both FSX and Falcon, and they are both excellent but there's no way I would buy a combat jet for FSX. I happen to agree that however good the simulation of the flight model could be in FSX it would miss out in failing to simulate the weapons systems.Have you tried Falcon 4 or Falcon Allied Force? The flight model is surprisingly good and it's a very challenging aircraft to fly well, especially land.Lawrence

Lawrence, your "chill out" comment is well taken. My apologies to everyone. In rereading my response, it seems harsh, I know. I will just say that it wasn't only a response to things in this thread, but to a series of similar messages, including from other forums. And by far the largest element behind it is something that I had best not touch with a 10 foot pole at this point, because it would just sound like an accusation and would spiral towards unpleasantness. Best to just accept that some things are the way they are. There's no way anyone else reading all this might've known that though, and yes, you're right. I bought Falcon 4 the day it hit stores, by the way, and it's still great. I always loved it, the two Janes titles, and especially MiG Alley. Ahhh, the days of Papadoc and all those CSIPGFS personalities.... I've been doing the flight-sim thing since Falcon 3 and DOS memmaker boot disks, so am (hopefully) not entirely ignorant of what the combat side of flight simulation has to offer. I just prefer the flying to the fighting at this point. I guess there's only so much any one program can have, and to me it's seemed that the more of it that goes to combat, the less that can go towards flight. But it's all good. Everything's a compromise in one way or another. I guess the ideal would be if someone could just "plug" Falcon 4 into FSX as a module. Now THAT would be incredible. Completely impossible, but fun to think about.

[byork 2,259]

Not an FSX add-on, but I'm looking forward to the release of this one:DCS: Black Shark.http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/The Russian version is already available. The English version should be out soon.

[sprintz 0]

I would put TrackIR4 Pro in it's own category. Do anything you have to to keep that one as a "certainty." That product will TOTALLY revamp the way you fly and the way you feel about flying. No kidding there.Might want to check out Aerosoft's Bush Hawk. Eaglesoft's offerings are also very well done.

I started flight simming just after Christmas last year so this is the first Xmas that I have a chance to put some great add-ons to my Xmas List. What suggestions do you have for high quality, "must have" programs and hardware? I mostly fly GA aircraft and enjoy flying challenging IFR approaches down to minimums. I also like flying VFR in my local area (Salt Lake City, Utah USA). My goal is to only have ultra high quality products that bring simming as close to the real world as possible.Here is my shortlist so far. What would you add or change?- TrackIR4 Pro- REXAnd here is what I have so far...- Alphasim LongEZ for VFR flying- Dreamfleet Dakota- FSD Saratoga- RealityXP 430 & 530- Saitek Yoke and Panel- SimCharts by JeppessenWhat have you really enjoyed that, in hindsight, you'd hate to fly without?Thanks!PS - I'd also really love a tool that allows me to track my aircraft position on georeferenced low altitude enroute charts. Is there such a thing?

[Guest Mower]

Not an FSX add-on, but I'm looking forward to the release of this one:DCS: Black Shark.http://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/The Russian version is already available. The English version should be out soon.

Yes I have been following this for years but am dismayed by the choice of the dubious and notorious protection starforce. Whether I buy BS now is questionable at best. Even though SF can be stripped off by hacks I do not wish to send a signal that I support PROVEN malware SF.

[Squatdrop 25]

Hi !Nobody here heard about FSPASSENGERS X ?... :( Coming soon.http://www.fspassengers.com/forum/read.php...740&t=41740

[Guest dougwells]

Thanks for all the input. My list for Santa is growing by the day.Any word on if/when a new TrackIR is coming out (TrackIR 5?). I guess if anything was coming out for the holidays, it would have been released by now....

[ccaughie 0]

I agree that the TrackIR is a great bit of hardware, but personally I'd go for the rudder pedals before the TrackIR. I often fly without my TrackIR (usually because there's light coming from either the window or the fireplace behind me that will mess it up), but when my rudder pedals were broken for a while I almost stopped using the sim altogether because it just didn't seem right without them.But YMMV. Depends on whether you're after a good visual experience or a realistic flying experience (and I'm not saying you "should" prefer either one over the other).Colin