Haven't bought it (or the Mustang), but bought the Islands and the Maule...I saw a Zero today. It barrel rolled around my Stearman, then soared up into the sky... made me wonder...Did the Zero have 'Japanese' instruments or could a pilot from any country fly each other's planes?

i'm not going to buy ANYTHING... i'm not going to spend my money and time in a casual game.. i'm a simulator guy :>

Not me. Not ever. In all my previous flight sims I always used the cockpit view. I never ever leave the VC while flying, not even to take a screenshot. So I will never ever buy a VC-less plane.

I almost got the zero just because i have that exact number of GFWL points remaning, but i'll use them on Alaska when its out.

That's how they get you, glad you can pay with real cash on the pc marketplace.

No means no as far as I'm concerned. No cockpit, no sale. And to elaborate on why that is...It's not about being 'hard core', I couldn't give a crap whether Flight is hard core or not, it isn't its stated design aim to be hard core. Rather it is about the enjoyment of the challenges which flying offers, being made accessible to people who don't want to read a 400 page manual, and I'm all for that, as long as that is in fact what it is doing.But take for example the Maule: Its reason for existence, both in real life and in Flight, is that it is a rugged STOL aeroplane designed for getting into and out of small, rough airfields. Because that is so, it has a cockpit with very good downward and lateral visibility, even being capable of flying with the doors removed, in order to facilitate the ability to see clearly when flying steep approaches and departures close to obstructions. So the cockpit design is one where form follows function, thus functionality in either real life, or a simulation, is affected by form. This aspect therefore becomes part of the challenges it presents in the game because it has the cockpit included.Now take the A6M: Its reason for existence is as a fighter/interceptor. Nowadays, old WW2 fighters that are still airworthy, fly as either living memorials, or occasionally as racers at places such as Reno. This means an A6M can have a function in Flight as a racer or aerobatic aircraft, but without a cockpit, much of the challenge in doing these things is completely removed. Fighters are designed primarily with good upwards and rearwards visibility, typically with 'blown' canopies, so that the pilot can look out for enemy aeroplanes. Downward visibility is invariably limited by the fact that the cockpits are often armored, since they are likely to be shot at, although a half roll so that one can look below, or simply the fact that air attacks tend to come from a 'bounce' from above and behind, means that upwards and rearwards visibility are the important bits where fighter designs are concerned. This means that a taildragger WW2 era fighter essentially has a fairly crappy forwards and downwards view, and therefore has to land using either a sideslip, or a curved steep approach, and low down, the inability to clearly discern terrain and trees presents a considerable risk to this, not to mention the fact that the broad low wings of most fighters mean that half of the State of Texas could be concealed under that wing when up at 8,000 feet and looking from the cockpit. Remove the need to be in the cockpit by only having a chase view, and that risk, and the challenge which comes with it, is also removed, and the last time I checked, removing challenges from games was not really a great idea if you want them to be fun.Compare for example, how much more fun and challenging it would be to land the Stearman from its cockpit view, compared to any aircraft where you can come straight at the runway because you have a panoramic chase view.Flight is a simple flight sim designed to appeal to those who are put off by the notion of flight sims requiring hours of nerdy study to even get the engine started, and in this respect, Flight is a great idea which I completely welcome, as it provides an 'in' for those who are dissuaded from jumping into simming with only complex options presented to them doing so. But there is a world of difference between simple to get into and grossly oversimplified to the point where it becomes Hello Kitty Island My Little Pony Flight Sim. People who want a sim that is easy to get into, are still people who like aeroplanes, and merely want the challenges they offer presented to them in a less nerdy way, and half that challenge is gone when you fly from a chase view. Make flying from the chase view an option sure, but don't make it the only option. Because it you do, I'll exercise my option to not buy it, and I won't be the only one.Al

Very good point, and elaboration into your reasons not to buy a cockpitless taildragger!Thx for sharing your thoughts on it Al !

No means no as far as I'm concerned. No cockpit, no sale. And to elaborate on why that is...It's not about being 'hard core', I couldn't give a crap whether Flight is hard core or not, it isn't its stated design aim to be hard core. Rather it is about the enjoyment of the challenges which flying offers, being made accessible to people who don't want to read a 400 page manual, and I'm all for that, as long as that is in fact what it is doing.But take for example the Maule: Its reason for existence, both in real life and in Flight, is that it is a rugged STOL aeroplane designed for getting into and out of small, rough airfields. Because that is so, it has a cockpit with very good downward and lateral visibility, even being capable of flying with the doors removed, in order to facilitate the ability to see clearly when flying steep approaches and departures close to obstructions. So the cockpit design is one where form follows function, thus functionality in either real life, or a simulation, is affected by form. This aspect therefore becomes part of the challenges it presents in the game because it has the cockpit included.Now take the A6M: Its reason for existence is as a fighter/interceptor. Nowadays, old WW2 fighters that are still airworthy, fly as either living memorials, or occasionally as racers at places such as Reno. This means an A6M can have a function in Flight as a racer or aerobatic aircraft, but without a cockpit, much of the challenge in doing these things is completely removed. Fighters are designed primarily with good upwards and rearwards visibility, typically with 'blown' canopies, so that the pilot can look out for enemy aeroplanes. Downward visibility is invariably limited by the fact that the cockpits are often armored, since they are likely to be shot at, although a half roll so that one can look below, or simply the fact that air attacks tend to come from a 'bounce' from above and behind, means that upwards and rearwards visibility are the important bits where fighter designs are concerned. This means that a taildragger WW2 era fighter essentially has a fairly crappy forwards and downwards view, and therefore has to land using either a sideslip, or a curved steep approach, and low down, the inability to clearly discern terrain and trees presents a considerable risk to this. Remove the need to be in the cockpit by only having a chase view, and that risk, and the challenge which comes with it, is also removed, and the last time I checked, removing challenges from games was not really a great idea if you want them to be fun.Compare for example, how much more fun and challenging it would be to land the Stearman from its cockpit view, compared to any aircraft where you can come straight at the runway because you have a panoramic chase view.Flight is a simple flight sim designed to appeal to those who are put off by the notion of flight sims requiring hours of nerdy study to even get the engine started, and in this respect, Flight is a great idea which I completely welcome, as it provides an 'in' for those who are dissuaded from jumping into simming with only complex options presented to them doing so. But there is a world of difference between simple to get into and grossly oversimplified to the point where it becomes Hello Kitty Island My Little Pony Flight Sim. People who want a sim that is easy to get into, are still people who like aeroplanes, and merely want the challenges they offer presented to them in a less nerdy way, and half that challenge is gone when you fly from a chase view. Make flying from the chase view an option sure, but don't make it the only option.Al

^^ What Al said :)No really does mean no..It doesn't matter which plane it is; if it has no cockpit, I won't buy it.jake

Arwen, you don't even guess how much I wish I had one of those HUDs displayed on the canopy of my glider... :-)

I will not buy an aircraft without a cockpit, because I fly from the cockpit and don't use the HUD.

No P-51 and no Zero here.I have no passion for these two aircraft and I like to fly my planes from a functioning VC.But I love the Stearman and RV6. Maule is on the shopping list.

Arwen,you don't even guess how much I wish I had one of those HUDs displayed on the canopy of my glider... :-)

I'm not against HUDs . . . I just prefer to use the instruments, and Flight's instruments are very good overall.I have nothing against flying a military aircraft in a flightsim that has a HUD (if it is modeled on the real aircraft's HUD).

^^^ Same here, what Al so eloquently wrote. He deserves a Cake.

Will not purchase. It looks nice but I'm not into warplanes and I will only fly aircraft with a VC.

I'm not against HUDs . . . I just prefer to use the instruments, and Flight's instruments are very good overall.I have nothing against flying a military aircraft in a flightsim that has a HUD (if it is modeled on the real aircraft's HUD).

I wish MSGS had actually coded the HUD to look like a HUD, and not how it's currently done.

no. i wouldn't download it even if it would be freeware, and... no force feedback - no ms flight.

I have not and will not buy an aircraft without a cockpit, not even something as simple as a hang glider... show me the bar!