""Another reason why I try not to give a sh*t what the publicthinks. I could care less about VC's and all that...I mean,I'm working on one or two, but they're not a priority for me.If people wanna be stuck up and assume anything without a VCisn't worth flying, hey, you're entitled to your opinion, andI have a middle finger ready for you.""*edited for language that brought me down to Ericks level.Great, a new source for AI aircraft.firstly I don't assume an aircraft with no VC is not worth flying, just I don't wish to fly it, there is a difference. I have a few guys that fly with me that don't prefer a VC, our CEO could go either way, fine their choice, no hard feelings, unlike some others. I can think of a few other great designers that produce fabulous aircraft....without VCs, more power to them!No need to get self righteous about it, you design what you want to design and I will fly what I wish to fly. I don't expect any designer to include a VC just for me, design what you want for yourself (or some VAs), as you obviously do. I am 1/2 way done with my first aircraft in FSDS and yes, it has a detailed VC, which I did for myself, as "I" intend to fly it.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/PBTMCa.jpgCalVirAir International VACougar Mountain Helicopters & Aviation[link:www.cgrmthelos.com]Cougar Mountain Helicopters

>Guess no one has come up with an "Angry Troll" banners yet.>:DROFL! :-lol :-lol

>Hi, Tom.>I don't think I miss much, I fly on almost daily basis. I>recommend you guys do the same, save your $30-40 you throw>away on this elusive emersion and get some real flying done.>The immersion factor between the free and $30 model is not>worth the money, is what I am trying to tell you, but it's>your money. TV>who are you to decide what's worth it for me?For that $30 I can get a hundred hours or more of fun and entertainment.To fly for real I'd have to pay nearly $200 an hour for an aircraft and instructor to get my PPL (not to mention several thousand more in ground instruction, exams, medicals (which I might well not pass), etc. etc.).After that I'd then have to pay over $150 an hour for aircraft rental to fly.Maybe where you live flying for real is cheap, where I live it's something I cannot afford and neither can most others who live here.Note I've converted cost into dollars so you would understand the amounts...So according to you I'd have more fun if I spent $20.000 on real flying than when spending $30 on an FS addon?I think so too, and if you transfer $20.000 into my bank account that's exactly what I will do. But in the time I can't spend in the air because of scheduling or weather I will still have fun with that $30 addon while you pine looking at the clouds and your calendar...

Like me, Tom is in the Netherlands. The medical regulations here are far stricter than in the US.Any of the reasons you mention and then some will ground you for life.And not just for motorised flying either, the same medical criteria are also applied to ultralights and gliders leaving only hanggliders as an option. In a country where the only place you can use a hangglider is a 20m high sand dune on the beach that's not a very big passtime as you might understand.In fact, I am almost certain I will not pass the medical if I try.My right eye cannot be corrected with glasses or contacts to more than 90% of perfect vision. That in this country means you fail the medical immediately! Correction using surgery or laser treatment also means an automatic failure of your medical so is out of the question.Getting a US PPL for us (as in the US it's both cheaper and less stringent to get) is not an option either as US PPL is not valid here.With a US PPL we're only allowed to fly aircraft registered outside the EU, of which there are very few (and those of course overworked in the extreme and often not up for rental or highly expensive if they are available, think $200+ an hour for a 30 year old 172M or N).So for many of us who might be able to fly in the US there are TWO reasons we cannot:1) the cost is prohibitive at two to three times the US cost2) the medical requirements are so much more strict those alone prevent many from flyingFor a few there comes a third reason and that's that our exam requirements for PPL are far stricter than those the FAA uses.This means that the failure rate for exams (especially theoretical) is a lot higher.9 exams to be passed of 70 questions EACH, all within 6 months of the first. If you don't make it, all the ones already passed are void and have to be taken again.If you don't pass your flying test within a year of passing the theoretical, the theoretical is void and has to be taken again.There's people that can't make it because they can't study that fast (many people are slow to absorb knowledge).There's also people that simply don't have the time to spend on passing all those exams (and study for them) in quick succession.And of course there's the cost. The exam fees alone come to over a thousand dollar all total, and that's without tutoring, books, etc. which you need (nor the aircraft rental, fuel and landing fees for the flying test which come to several hundred more).

I wasn't talking about you. I was talking about people who've come up to me through IM/email and said my planes were crap since they have no VC. Those people get on my nerves...People design what they want to design and it really makes me mad when people jump on them for not adding something - I never said anyone in this thread has done it, but I'm saying, it's been done before and it's really kind of...silly.People should design what they want the way they want to...it's just that simple. People who jump down designers' throats for not doing aircraft to their own specifications are full of themselves. If it makes you happy, go for it. If not, then don't.Like someone once said: "Just listen to my music and enjoy it."

Way to go Erick!....great to see a designer who is not affected by what the public think! :)regardsEdhttp://forums.avsim.net/user_files/60974.jpg

I agree with Ericks' sentiment...let him design what HE wants, and if WE like it, great! If not, oh well, fly something else. No need to dog him for it though (or of course, ANY of the freeware designers).I don't worry about VC's...normaly, given the option, such as with the POSKY A330 and 757's, I download the Non-VC version. It eats far fewer resources and the plane handles and flies much better without that extra 'baggage' running in the background even when it's not being used! Also, on a more cosmetic note, I find it irritating to have different layouts between 2D and the 3D panels, even when they are both from the same developer (even the default Microsoft!)...it's annoying to try to find a control on the VC and find that it's not there!! Or it's moved!!Nope, for me, a good model with good textures, that 'feels' right when you fly it, and a well layed out, accurate looking 2D panel are what I look for. If it has a VC that doesn't interfere with FPS, bonus, although I only use it as a viewing platform 'cause it can look neat from that perspective!!

>Hi, Tom.>I am sorry to hear about your problem, write me a private>Email message, if you want, and let me understand more about>your situation, I may be able to help.>I never said that anyone has to get their PPL to go flying,>just go to your local FBO, get an Instructor, and fly. I've>had people with serious handicaps, no legs, cannot hear etc.>do the flying, and some got their PPL. In addition there are>other types of flying / licenses that you can get that are>less demanding, health wise. Again, it is not my intention to>have anyone not enjoy flying, even if it is simulated, my>intention is to point out that the same enjoyment can be>gotten for free, and we all should appreciate that. Without>them there would be no BBS no conversations like these, no>exchange of knowledge and information. Someone is always>subsidizing someone else, until they become self sufficient,>then it's time to give back, not take more. Most of these pay>ware guys used the freeware subsidizing, now some are turning>against them, for no good reason. TV>>now see..that's nice...but i know that EVEN if you were the president of the USA(yes,truly!,i'm an epileptic...can't even drive my own car now,my license has been revoked as of last month) you could not help me,and that is why i am so darned happy with all the stuff that enhances my sim experience...be it freeware or payware.case in point:FSUIPC...where would i be WITHOUT that?or HJG...they give me the chance to fly the aircraft i like best...for free...in other words:payware is dead...long live payware.orFreeware is dead...long live freeware.they both give me tremendous enjoyment,and i don't give a hoot if one sets me back 30 dollars,and the other is free,what i DO care about is that BOTH add enormous fun to my "game"and that's enough for me.also because for the cost of one FSaddon i can merely park my car at the FBO...no flying done,and no instructor spoken.so,i choose to buy,or download,those things i think'll enhance my simming experience,and you know what?a lot of freeware does,and a lot of payware does too.and as i said earlier:I'M HAVING A BLAST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!so thank you MS,thank you freeware designers,but also:thank you payware designers,cos i'm having loads of fun with all the stuff you guys built.there,i feel better now,i'll fly my DC8 ;-)

i'm with you guys on that.i only fly the HJG -8,and ffx 727/737,and CS727,and having a good panel with sideviews is for me FAR more important as a detailed VC...on the other hand,if i fly Antti's Dauphin,or Jordan Moore's Jayhawk or Skycrane,i sometimes jump in the VC....the FPS are better

Certainly, designers should develop their stuff however they want. They are the ones doing all the work. But when it comes to payware, I expect all the holes to be filled. Thats what sets payware apart afaic. If I d/l a freeware plane and it has no VC, thats fine. If all the other elements are well designed, so be it ( I'd certainly never email a designer requesting he "get to work" on a VC for me). But I'd be annoyed if I paid 20 or 30 dollars for a plane and found it missing a VC. Not becuase I think VC are "better" than 2D panels but becuase I simply consider them part of the complete package now and not having one leaves a bit of in unfinished feeling about it. I don't know why theres always such a debate about the VCs anyway. I mean they just represent another way of looking out at the world. In most cases, the 2D panel remains the best choice for intense button pushing, but I find the VC simply gives me more of a feeling of being "in the machine." So, when I need to push buttons and flick switches, I go to the 2D panel. When I'm just cruising around enjoying the scenery, I'm in the VC.

"BUTTER!""PARKAY!""BUTTER!""PARKAY!""TASTES GREAT!""LESS FILLING!""TASTES GREAT!""LESS FILLING!"@-@Bob ScottATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-VWashington, D.C.

""I wasn't talking about you. I was talking about people who'vecome up to me through IM/email and said my planes were crapsince they have no VC. Those people get on my nerves...""Point taken Erick, and yes, I do agree, I have gotten my share of emails with "demands" or "expectations" attached from my scenery design, I don't let it bother me, but find it annoying that people have to act this way. I'm sure I'll get more of it as I get further into aircraft design.Regards, MichaelKDFWhttp://www.calvirair.com/mcpics/PBTMCa.jpgCalVirAir International VACougar Mountain Helicopters & Aviation[link:www.cgrmthelos.com]Cougar Mountain Helicopters

>"BUTTER!">>"PARKAY!">>"BUTTER!">>"PARKAY!">>"TASTES GREAT!">>"LESS FILLING!">>"TASTES GREAT!">>"LESS FILLING!">>>>@-@>>Bob Scott>ATP IMEL Gulfstream II-III-IV-V>Washington, D.C.sure mate ;-)now just take your medication...it'll be allright buddy...it'll be allright.

>I

edited out.....