A remark related to this subject:The Aircraft Editor (FSEDIT.EXE) is no longer included in Flight Simulator! Please correct me if I'm wrong.It seems to me that Microsoft doesn't want people creating or editing flight models!

I'd just like to clarify a few things based on one or two comments above.First, I'm not FS Aviator- that was a post I carried over from the developer's forum. I can take no credit for the knowledge demonstrated there.Second, for the person(s) who may have been annoyed at my "reposting", I respond that this is a very important issue which many people were not aware of, as they don't follow the other forums. There are so many posts about various things related to 2004 right now that its easy for an important one to get lost. I've certainly seen follow up posts on far less significant matters that don't get flamed or criticized.If you don't want to read it, you don't have to and it won't affect your day in the least. These forums are about sharing information, and I feel I did that in a respectful and considerate way. If you disagree I sincerely apologize.Best,Joel

....I never tried FSEDIT...but I seem to remember reading that it created more trouble than naught. ....I'm under the impression that by transferring as much data to the Aircraft.CFG as they have, the developers are trying to make the tweaking process a more accessable,plain text affair. More useful for the majority of common flightsim users....Deletion of the FSEDIT is just the removal of one more troublesome thing that generated discontent with users...More complex work has alway been possible with a number of Airfile editors. Perhaps the most popular, commonly available is AirEd by William Roth, available at the AV.History site:http://www.avhistory.org/...AirEd precisely here:http://members.dsl-only.net/~eagle/....First timers with AirEd can get a good idea of what the entries mean, by reading the ini file entry descriptions.

James, I agree with you about FSEDIT problems and limitations.My point is that it seems suspect that FSEDIT has been excluded (not patched or improved) from FS2004 and many AIRCRAFT.CFG flight parameters have been made non editable (i.e. FS ignores the parameter value in AIRCRAFT.CFG).

Quote: "Its Just a 55 dollar Flight Sim"15,000,000 Dollars (Full Motion Sim)------------------ = 272,728 Users Required to buy FS9 55 Dollars (FS9)Or to Put it another wayIf 280,000 Copies of FS9 are sold worldwide!!!!!!!then 280,000 * 55 = 15.4 Million Dollars (Production & developement costs apply in both cases)Go on prove that ive done the maths wrong!!!!!!!!How many people bought FS2002 worldwide last time round, does any one know the answer to this?

If it's indeed the case that FS2004 means a big step backward in flight dynamics for add-on aircraft, Avsim should revise its 5-star rating

Joel - I'm glad you posted that here, I'm not sure I would've seen it otherwise, I rarely check the aircraft/panel forum anyways, so thank you.As far as it only being a "$55 dollar game, what do you expect?" argument, it doesn't matter if I paid $55,000 or $5, the fact is I PAID for it, FS2004 wasn't given to me, I had to work in order to earn the money to fork over to Microsoft for their efforts. The problem lies in the fact that it's advertised as "as real as it gets", and I know it's only a tagline. I just bought a new Ford Expedition, V8, I traded in a Ford F-150, V8 to buy it. My F-150's V8 ran on all 8 cylinders. If I found out that my Expedition only ran on say, 7 cylinders, and Ford tried to tell me that's normal, I'd be ######, and then when I talked about to other people and they told me to be patient and quit complaining, I'd be even more ######. I'm not at that point yet, mainly because I don't know the ins and outs of what's going on and because I haven't been able to spend as much time on the sim as I'd like. We'll see how this plays out.Now, one last thing to complain about, and this has been bothering me for a long time (then I'll quit b!tching, I promise), when did software companies get the licence to sell shoddy merchandise? I think there needs to be some sort of lemon law or warranty for software. And I'm not just talking about MSFS either, but I'm sure everyone's run into this. A software program is released and it either doesn't work, or works like crap, and what is really done about it? Some people do make enough noise that they get their money back, but most just sit back and accept it. Software should be like every other kind of merchandise. If I buy a car and it doesn't run, if I buy milk and it's spoiled, I buy a lightbulb and it doesn't turn on, I buy a color tv and green looks like purple, all these things you better believe would be returned!! Just a rant, not enough sleep so I apologise in advance. Wow, glad to get that off my chest, okay complain mode over.

There seems to be a lot of energy around this issue.The interesting thing to me is 98% of the people who will buy FS2004 - including many hardcore simmers in our community correct flight model from an incorrect one. It took a group of very talented people to identify the bug - and I bet 90% of the general simming public (myself included), had no idea what they were discussing.But what bothers me more than anything is the general attitude that MS is "out to screw us and can't do anything right." In case you missed the last 5 years, go check out some of the AVSIM reviews from FS98 and see how much this product has progressed in the last 5 years. Is it perfect? Of course not, but it's pretty darn impressive.At the risk of sound like some of the more "mature" members of our community that always blast the impatience of the younger generation - I remember how much fun I had with FS3 where I happily tooled around 5 geographical areas in cotton ball clouds and no add-on aircraft. I was amazed that I could simulate flight for $50.If you would have showed me how technology would progress in 17 years and what I'd get for the same $50 (which would have been $80 when I bought FS3) - I wouldn't have never beleived it.In case you missed the demise of ProPilot and FLY!, this is the only game in town. Yet MS has thrown their heart and soul into the last two releases. It's not like they gave us half baked bug infested junk (remember FS5 anyone?). If this was a legitimate or oversite - this seems something worthy of a fix. Much more so than bridges. (don't get me on that rant)edBTW, comparing a $50 of entertainment software to a vehicle is ridiculous. But as a former Ford owner - just wait for those recall notices to start flying in so they can "patch" your Expedition. :)

Gentlemen, :-)All great discussions and certainly a valid concern. Last week this forum was buzzing with all kinds of woes and problems. In one week, the mood has changed to be more positive and focused on problem solving and assisting others. Much progress has been made here.I will be surprised if this issue isn't overcome in short order. The FDE guys love a challenge and they are up to it. They have better tools now, better knowledge of more of the FD engine and the parameters that drive it. Certainly they are frustrated after the thousands of hours invested to get to where they are, rightfully so. But in time, this bump in the road will be overcome and we will all move forward with other things, other challenges, and enjoyment of the sim.I have every confidence in the talents of these gentlemen. Give them some support and they will deliver.RegardsMilton

>BTW, comparing a $50 of entertainment software to a vehicle is>ridiculous. But as a former Ford owner - just wait for those>recall notices to start flying in so they can "patch" your>Expedition. :)Yes it is, but that wasn't the point, the fact is I PAID money for it, but yeah, it's stretch, LOL.I'm sure they're going to have to "patch" the Expedition too :)

This may be a sad thing to say in a place like this but we are not typical FS customer. In reality we are the hardcore members of a hobby/game/devotion that is declining in mass popularity rapidly. Although I have never worked in game design, I have to believe in todays world of saturated entertainment options getting people immersed in your title must be the most important aspect of game design and marketing. When dealing with a complex area like flight simulation, the only way I know of increasing that level of immersion is to make it easier for a wider number of people to use - Also known as dumbing down the product. This has happened in every other aspect of entertainment so why should games/hobbies/devotions be different. We may berate them/ignore them or consider them heratics in our temple, since they refers eye candy to realism, but if the casual gamers stop buying this product, I am willing to bet you MS folds the tent on this little "hobby" real fast.And for all of you who think someone out there is waiting in the wings with the next best flight sim stroll over to the Fly forum... Oops I forgot there is another superior product gathering dust in the 3 for $10 bin under the banner games you'll never see again!

I read parts of the original thread last night. At the time it seemed there might be a work around.I find, but probably should not be surprised, the lack of respect and lack of concern unbelieveable.It does not matter a whit how much the simulator costs, that's number one.Number two is why can't you understand the importance of this discovery and how it will effect your enjoyment of the sim? Look at the complaints that flood developer's forums when a new product is released. And just how dto they fix such complaints? Why by editing the airfile or aircraft.cfg. In other words they tweak the FDE. By removing two very important variables MS have drastically reduced the developer's ability to correct aircraft performance to the expectations of thier customers. In other words you will not get what you expect when you buy an add-on.Now I may be wrong, but it looks to me like Ron would not have been able to create the FDE for the DF C310 without these variables, instead of being a wonderfully unique and enjoyable challange, albeit a "game" as some describe it, the 310 would just be a 172 with an animation attached to it.I'm sorry but that is a very sad thing to me and limit's the future possibilites for FS. Luckily we can still run FS2002 and fly the great a/c developed there. Although I do have FS2004, I think now it will be the game and FS2002 will be the sim.

wow..this is a real important message!!NOT!sheesh... :-erks

personally, I think it is way too early to pass judgment on the new flight modeling -- and to go so far as whip up conspiracy theories. I suspect we do not yet have the full story. I too have been troubled that my own flight models have the same symptoms as other 3rd party planes (nose-heaviness, lack of elevator control, etc.). Yet, In just two or three evenings I am now pretty close to finding an acceptible fix until I know more about the sim to dive into the flight model even more.I do believe I read somewhere that a new fsedit will be included with the SDK. I have a hunch that things such as twist, incidence, etc are in there somewhere -- but we just don't have the full picture yet. I have updated my planes' flight models through fs98, cfs1, fs2000, cfs2, fs2002 and now fs2004, and each time something like this has happened. People may cry foul at first, but when the dust settles we end up with more realism.For now, I'm just going to keep tweaking my flight models and enjoy the beautiful new clouds, sunsets, etc. FS2004 is a great sim, IMO.- dcc

John,If not for this "rehash" - I personally would have missed this issue.I am extremely angry with Microsoft for doing such an act.The fact that they downgraded the product at our expense in order to handicap the competition is outrageous !This post should be permanently anchored in bold letters !Twister