While I was convalescing from having some surgery in South America, I decided to pull everything I deemed decently flyable out of my FS9 hangar and fly one good leg in each of 'em.In that week I didn't come anywhere close to flying even half of them just once.Same for scenery...I recently bought a great package of something like 47 TropicalSim FS9 sceneries that covers just about the whole Carribean, and haven't come close to getting to all of them even once yet.I don't mourn the loss of development for FS9...it had to happen some day. But the loss of FS9 developers doesn't at all mean the loss of FS9. It just means I can fly FS9 without the temptation to get my wallet out quite so often.CheersBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

Now we can all agree Bob. While you and others can now avoid the temptation to "pull out the plastic", FS developers can avoid the temptation to do a two to three year project for an FS9 market that is in decline. :(

Bob, Aerosoft says their FS9 sales are little more than 10% of their FSX sales FOR A PRODUCT THAT IS MADE BOTH FOR FS9 AND FSX.I think that is reality that has to be accepted. Same thing will happen to FSX in the future, and again we will have to live with it.

Well said Darem, facts are facts... :(

FS developers can avoid the temptation to do a two to three year project for an FS9 market that is in decline. :(

True. Also true that the FS franchise is at the moment going the way of the Titanic. Not sure where this hobby will go after every interesting FS10 addon is marketed and sold by multiple developers. Oh well.Pat

To be honest CLS's new 767 is one of the best addon aircraft that I own for the larger jet type.It is so smooth in operation as far as the frame rate load department with great sytems ,detailed features,all the eye candy you can pack and wonderful performance. The new 767 is almost like flying a default fs9 aircraft when you compare it to frame the rate drop.Another product I have recently purchased for fs9 that looks great and has great frame rate load is UK2000 SCENERY - MANCHESTER XTREME EGCC which is just wonderful all the way around as for most of his XTREME line of products made by this great developer. Which is a real shame because the fact is most developers are getting better with time and the loss of such talent to a great sim( fs9 ) that can handle these new improvements with great overall performance on top of that will be no longer an option.Everytime I buy a FSX product, I wish it was for fs9 instead . I have nothing against fsx . The fact is it is a hardware pig that can beat down the newest fastest hardware like it was a joke.Most pepole know fs9 can look almost as good as fsx in many ways . I am so glad that the great developer FSDT is still making products for fs9 .As for me, if it is a new and good looking product for fs9 you can count on me to buy a copy.I just feel places like avsim or any other great sim forum is where developers need to learn what the people want before they spend all kinds of work into it. In the long run we all win. :( By the way guys ,who was making that new 328JET for fs9?

True. Also true that the FS franchise is at the moment going the way of the Titanic. Not sure where this hobby will go after every interesting FS10 addon is marketed and sold by multiple developers. Oh well.Pat

I think maybe we, like the world we live in now, are a bit too addicted to growth and change, anyway. If I had to freeze the FS configuration I already have on my PC and live with it for the next 20 years, I could be doing new things with it every single day. We get so focused on what new add-on is coming out tomorrow we forget about the tons of good ones we've already got buried three-deep in the hangar, which I think was Jan's point and I know was mine.I have a 35-year old Gibson ES-335 dotneck guitar plugged into a Mesa Boogie amp on the other end of my sim cave, and what happens when I pick it up isn't the same on any two days. I don't need to go out and get a new guitar to have a new experience every time I play it. Likewise, with FS I think 45,000 worldwide airports, hundreds of good add-on planes, constantly changing weather, and new people to do it with, mean that the sim world will still go on long after the last commercial developer hangs it up.RegardsBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

I think most, if not all, has been said already, but there's something left I'd like to say, which is this: In my view, all the developers I still want FS9 stuff from are still developing for FS9. Tropicalsim, LatinVFR, Simwings and many other scenery developers are still doing stuff for FS9, and it's these guys I want products from. Sure, I can wait for another airplane, but why would I? There is a plane for pretty much everything I fly, and many of them are pretty darn good.Here are my hopes. That......LatinVFR does both La Paz El Alto intl and Santa Cruze Viru viru intl;...Tropicalsim makes a reincarnation of Piarco intl, which they already confirmed;...Intersim makes their KMIA scenery also for FS9, not just for FSX;...Qualitywings makes a good Boeing 777 in the vein of their Boeing 757.But you know, that's it really. I am mostly saturated with all the stuff I already have.

There's too many Citation X's out there. For FS9 I wanted to see highly realistic and systems detailed (up to the standards of Project Tupolev, Level-D, PMDG etc.... or even better):-SAAB 340-Airbus A300-Boeing 717-BAe 146/Avro RJ-DC-10-Vickers VC-10and a horde of Russian Aircraft, but nobody seems to be listening.The only decent Boeing 707 was from CaptainSim (even though it had its problems, I still enjoyed it). I find it bizarre that first they didn't improve it (there was unbelievable potential there) and than no-one else tried to do a superior version. I think a good new 707 would have sold well for FS9 (much better than a Citation X). Also it would be brilliant if someone updated the RFP 747 or did a good classic 747.We already have good B767 offerings, I've been really happy with the Level-D one for a long time. I do not see why we have all these different versions of it coming out now. Of course they're not going to sell that well for FS9, most of us already have the Level-D one.EDIT:I was also sad to see the Constellation Professional only made for FSX. This is another aircraft that would have probably sold well for FS9. At least there is the Manfred Jahn Connies and Starliner for FS9, which are really good in addition to other impressive freeware.Well I'm still very happy with all the add-ons I have for FS9, just the Project Tupolev Tu-154M is enough to keep me using it (not to mention all the other planes, scenery and enhancements I've crammed in there).

HelloThe PSS / JF 757 is also a nice product, may not be as pretty as the CS 757 but has plenty of systems modeled and out of the two I prefer it.

I thought they stopped selling the PSS one. From what I've heard it does have good systems modeling and good Flight dynamics.

Quality Wings after SP1 is another contender. The only thing the CS model has over the QW version is a weather radar.

I was under the impression that Quality Wings offered a simplified 757. It would be good if they decided to offer more realism and complexity. If they've improved their 757 - well done to them.

I guess it will have to be up to some enterprising person to put up his funds, get his team togetherand spend at least a year or more in development and produce that high fidelity FS9 Airliner addon he believesthe people are clamoring for and will sell like crazy.Because other than that, its unlikely to happen.Regards.Ernie.

Ernie:You hit the nail right on the head. I've got the funds. Finding a team on the other hand is near impossible that are not already doing their own thing. TRUST me, I've been begging various developers for two years now. I challenge anyone here...get a team together and let me worry about the money to fund the projects.I'm willing to put MY money where my big mouth is :( Mike

Ernie:You hit the nail right on the head. I've got the funds. Finding a team on the other hand is near impossible that are not already doing their own thing. TRUST me, I've been begging various developers for two years now. I challenge anyone here...get a team together and let me worry about the money to fund the projects.I'm willing to put MY money where my big mouth is :( Mike

Mike, are you saying you will fully fund an FS9 project all the way through to release and after and live with the consequnce if you take a cold, cold, bath?What about a negative ROI? Please consider the realities of such a commitment and drop me a line. :(

I think maybe we, like the world we live in now, are a bit too addicted to growth and change, anyway. If I had to freeze the FS configuration I already have on my PC and live with it for the next 20 years, I could be doing new things with it every single day. We get so focused on what new add-on is coming out tomorrow we forget about the tons of good ones we've already got buried three-deep in the hangar, which I think was Jan's point and I know was mine.I have a 35-year old Gibson ES-335 dotneck guitar plugged into a Mesa Boogie amp on the other end of my sim cave, and what happens when I pick it up isn't the same on any two days. I don't need to go out and get a new guitar to have a new experience every time I play it. Likewise, with FS I think 45,000 worldwide airports, hundreds of good add-on planes, constantly changing weather, and new people to do it with, mean that the sim world will still go on long after the last commercial developer hangs it up.RegardsBob ScottColonel, USAF (ret)ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VColorado Springs, CO

Agreed Bob, when things get wild it's nice to grab the old "Strat" and remember the whole world doesn't revolve around our beloved FS hobby. :(

Mike, are you saying you will fully fund an FS9 project all the way through to release and after and live with the consequnce if you take a cold, cold, bath?What about a negative ROI? Please consider the realities of such a commitment and drop me a line. :(Yessir, that's EXACTLY what I am saying. The reason being is that I go into such ventures with eyes wide open. I would not fund a project that is "niche" within an already niche market. There are so many projects just for FS9 that have yet to be touched its not funny and bet dollars to dounts the right projects WILL sell.At the end of the day, I have no illusions about getting rich developing for FS and worse case scenario my company takes a loss and its a tax writeoff at the end of the year. But I see a huge opportunity. 1/2 of the FS community is still on FS9 and most developers have left for FSX. With the proper funding a project will not have to take 2 years and can be attacked full time at significantly less time. Just sayin'....I'll be sure to drop you a line today! :-)

There's too many Citation X's out there. For FS9 I wanted to see highly realistic and systems detailed (up to the standards of Project Tupolev, Level-D, PMDG etc.... or even better):-SAAB 340-Airbus A300-Boeing 717-BAe 146/Avro RJ-DC-10-Vickers VC-10and a horde of Russian Aircraft, but nobody seems to be listening.The only decent Boeing 707 was from CaptainSim (even though it had its problems, I still enjoyed it). I find it bizarre that first they didn't improve it (there was unbelievable potential there) and than no-one else tried to do a superior version. I think a good new 707 would have sold well for FS9 (much better than a Citation X). Also it would be brilliant if someone updated the RFP 747 or did a good classic 747.We already have good B767 offerings, I've been really happy with the Level-D one for a long time. I do not see why we have all these different versions of it coming out now. Of course they're not going to sell that well for FS9, most of us already have the Level-D one.

Ron of Eaglesoft has said many times that the customer doesn't know what's best to develop and the customer is not always right. With thinking like that we'll continue to bleed off developers even for FSX (after the add-on void honeymoon is over) as their efforts don't pan out. Until developers figure it out and produce what people are asking for (like Feelthere) we'll continue to see excuses, platform change overs (FS9 to FSX, FSX to X-Plane and back), and closures like what happened to PSS (not related to pirating per say but lack of sales). If your going to sale something to somebody at least take stock is what they want.

I don't believe that the superb 'Project Tupolev' developers would have done their excellent feeware model if they thought that there are more people using FSX. Enough said? :(

Ron of Eaglesoft has said many times that the customer doesn't know what's best to develop and the customer is not always right. With thinking like that we'll continue to bleed off developers even for FSX (after the add-on void honeymoon is over) as their efforts don't pan out. Until developers figure it out and produce what people are asking for (like Feelthere) we'll continue to see excuses, platform change overs (FS9 to FSX, FSX to X-Plane and back), and closures like what happened to PSS (not related to pirating per say but lack of sales). If your going to sale something to somebody at least take stock is what they want.

Nothing personal... but you're bordering on advertising for Feelthere at this point in the thread. LOLAs for piracy... I know the impact of piracy on sales. Do you?

Ron of Eaglesoft has said many times that the customer doesn't know what's best to develop and the customer is not always right. With thinking like that we'll continue to bleed off developers even for FSX (after the add-on void honeymoon is over) as their efforts don't pan out. Until developers figure it out and produce what people are asking for (like Feelthere) we'll continue to see excuses, platform change overs (FS9 to FSX, FSX to X-Plane and back), and closures like what happened to PSS (not related to pirating per say but lack of sales). If your going to sale something to somebody at least take stock is what they want.

Dillon, allow me to remind you that you do not speak for me in any way. It is true that we do not consider the phrase or idea that "the customer is always right" as a valid basis given the clear facts that they are not "always right" but they are always the customer. :( I've repeatedly stated that I run and enjoy both FS9 and FSX and do not intend to remove FS9 from my system.Our position regarding future FS9 development is abundantly clear and we do not offer "excuses" for taking that path.Finally, we remember well a certain development house you've tested for who did not make the jump to FSX but instead relied on FS9 sales to stay afloat.The question for you to answer is what condition that development house is in today? We maintain that reliance on a declining FS9 market borders on business suicide. :(

Some good words there Mike T, and I really couldn't agree more. Maybe one day some developers will come around to listening to the customers opinion instead of force feeding our opinion to us. Until then I suppose we can all look forward to a plethora of pink pants.

I know this is a mean comment but in this case ...... no great shakes.CLS to me means; add-ons that are no more realistic than the default airliners (yeah I know they're meant to be 'lite' but yawn!), bit buggy in my experience and don't like the support / attitude from some in the CLS camp.There are some devs where I'd be devastated if they weren't developing for FS9 any more, but CLS aren't one of them.Davido.