Greetings everybody,I've been reading all those posts during the last weeks/months regarding the upcoming FS9/Century Of Flight with great interest.However, I am noticing that most of the questions are about AI Traffic, build in ATC, Scenery etc.I may be thinking different but that's not what I'm looking for in FS9.What I want is better simulated experience and in order to achieve that I give more points to the following areas:1. Aircraft systems simulated. Any change on these? Are hydralics, pneymatics and electrics PROPERLY simulated?2. Are the flight models any better?3. Weather. I am happy to read that the weather has indeed been improved.4. Proper ground handling simulation. Slippery runways when ice exists. Correct ground friction.5. Improved multiplayer capabilities without limiting the number of players.Nice looking scenery is welcome, but IMHO there are great scenery designers out there that with the proper tool(s) can make miracles.What I would like to see on this side however, are more landmarks, monuments, natural landmarks etc... After FS98 there is a great lack of those!Not to create a flame or anything... Just my personal thoughts.George DorkofikisAthens, Greece

George, I agree,I want all of these things+More. But when it comes down to it,M$ can only be expected to produce a platform for which the great freeware and payware developers can build onto.1) This can already be done with the correct programming knowledge.E.g PMDG'S upcoming FS2002/Fs2004 737NG, PIC767,Wilco's A320PIC(minus the FPS& Bugs)2) Again,we cant expect much from the default models can we(being realistic),I'd rather they focus on more important matters as weather,ATC,visual effects and black box features which allow the developers of payware/freeware do more3)Already being done ;)4) Yes. Something which needs attention-good point.5) True,but is it really that important?(In the larger scheme of things)I agree with you on the scenery front,and I dont think M$ is trying to match the freeware/payware developers cos they know thats impossible... new textures,taxiway signs,better autogen are about the best we can hope for. Which is good if there isnt any addon scenery out there for a specific airport and we must rely on the Defualt ( :-erks )RegardsJohnhttp://www.bavirtual.co.uk 680Hours ;)P 2.53 GHZ512 RAMWINXPGFORCE 4 128MB Ti4600http://vatsim.pilotmedia.fi/statusindicato...tor=OD1&a=a.jpg

I keep a running list of items that I would like to see improved on and scenery is a very small part of that list. ATC and Lighting are the two things that I've found could be looked into to improve any future releases of Flight sim.AI improvement suggestions:1) Ability to fly non-direct routes. Benefits would allow for simmers to create

That's an impressive piece of work!Nice job.Although some of the items are airport specific (like the green centerline lights) and are made according to the published charts, the list is very informative.However, I don't expect Microsoft to get into so much detail.One important visual clue that just crossed my mind are the runway markings. In USA those are made with the FAA standard...In the rest of the world they are painted according to the ICAO standard. An example are the threshold piano keys. The FAA standard says 4 stripes per side for a 45m wide runway, while the ICAO standard calls for 6 stripes per side for the same 45m wide runway.I will agree that FS is more like a platform.George DorkofikisAthens, Greece

>6) Allow for the auto brake to be configurable for increments>and decrements hotkeys or joystick assignments.Don't remember about FS7, but for sure it was already there in FS8. Just have a closer look at the keyboard assignments list.Etienne :-wave

will take a look. Thanks for the heads up. Anything that I can remove from my list is all the better.Kilstorm

hi guyshow about anti-aliasing gauges :-) . I think this feature is very important, or has it been added already?

>1. Aircraft systems simulated. Any change on these? Are>hydralics, pneymatics and electrics PROPERLY simulated?>2. Are the flight models any better?Probably nothing new in those areas. It is not even listed as part of FS2004 highlights. To get the best in aircraft simulation you have to go outside of the 'box'. That's the fact of life and I have no problem with it.Yes, if they fixed the friction bug - would be nice but slippery runways - I woudn't count on it, maybe in 2006 ...Michael J.http://hifi.avsim.net/activesky/images/wxrebeta.jpg

That's an impressive list you got there Kilstorm, I share with you ALL of your wishes and one more, FPS friendly (at least 20 fps in a low end machine like mine :-lol hmmmm what a dream ;( ). Definently a great suggestion list.For what I've read, some of the suggestions mentioned above are already in FS-COF, but I don't think we will have ALL of them in this edition. Remember, they are in Beta now, fixing bugs, tweaking a little, not adding new features. I hope I'm wrong, that would make the PERFECT sim...Now, judging from the screenshots recently posted coming from a very low end machine (no offence here Tom :-hah ) and the features listed in FS-COF web site, FS-COF is good enough for me to buy it. This new sim is definitely a new/better sim, I think is not a patch like some people have said. That is called evolution, things get better from one released to another, sometimes the improvement is bigger (FS2000 --> FS2002), sometimes is smaller (FS2002 --> FS2004 and I'm speculating here), but it is an improvement/evolution.Carlos.

Why post these wish lists here? I think a better use for them would be to email them to MS don't you? Letting us know what your wishes are will net you zero results in achieving those wishes. A more appropriate email to MS entailing those wishes would stand a better chance of them coming to fruition.

I agree - specially when the wish list constains every imaginable improvement and would take MS another decade to implement ...Michael J.http://hifi.avsim.net/activesky/images/wxrebeta.jpg

>Why post these wish lists here? I think a better use for them>would be to email them to MS don't you? Letting us know what>your wishes are will net you zero results in achieving those>wishes. A more appropriate email to MS entailing those wishes>would stand a better chance of them coming to fruition.I can't answer your question for Kilstorm, but...Microsoft is developing FS-COF for the whole flight sim community not only for Kilstorm. I think it was a great gesture to post this great list here, that opens the opportunity for us to reply and show our agreement with the idea and hence make it not only a one person

Well...The original post was not meant to be a wish list. After all it's too late for that now. And it was, it would be verrrry long!...It's more a question I do to myself (or anyone who can answer). What has changed INTO FS9 appart from the yadayada MS Marketing tells us about?AI is nice, improved ATC? Great... What else?... A new DC3, ok... a few more planes...But appart from that? What's new as a SIMULATOR? Get my point? :-)George DorkofikisAthens, Greece

On your Flight Planner #1 issue - is it not enough that in FS2002 you can already specify any parking spot at the departure airport? Or do you want to specify your arrival spot as well?Take care,--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_( this he")_x_x___

"What's new as a SIMULATOR?"A pretty Comprehensive weather system+older features being fixed or imporoved. Provided the price is right-its' got my vote ;)And to be honest George,you're post was and still is looking for wish lists...especially with a Topic subject of: "FS9/COF - What I am REALLY looking for! ".And as for the person who stores a wish list-may I ask why you would store your incredibly long list? Specifically for topics like this ;) No offence intended...RegardsJohnhttp://www.bavirtual.co.uk 685Hours ;)P 2.53 GHZ512 RAMWINXPGFORCE 4 128MB Ti4600http://vatsim.pilotmedia.fi/statusindicato...tor=OD1&a=a.jpg