I think because they removed the release date from Spring in the announcement, means that they are not able to finish it in spring.

If this were true in the flightsim world then just about every FS add-on maker would be out of business by now, either they have a 'done when it's done' release date, or they announce a release date only to delay it later. Airbus and Boeing also don't have a great track record when it comes to sticking to their 'release dates' for that matter.

 

PMDG usually misses the release predicted period even of a year but the overall simulation quality can be compared to a Boeing simulator one.

 

Alaska is only a matter of texturing the terrain and bitmapping the new WWII plane ( P40 2.0 Curling Edition ? ) . They are postponing the release because they are building up the missions and the aerocaches, being the the last one the core part of Flight according to MS.

 

That's the only reason and that's why they told " spring " ....also because they have just spent the last weeks patching what MS consider the most important part of Flight, the aerocaches.

Alaska is only a matter of texturing the terrain and bitmapping the new WWII plane...

In Hawaii I have been impressed by the details of the airports and the little towns, and of the planes like the Maule and RV...

Hawaii and Pearl Harbour have all too obvious WWII connotations for an American company, but I would be surprised to see this theme being carried into Alaska.

Less cynical comments would be very welcome.... :)

 

In Hawaii I have been impressed by the details of the airports and the little towns, and of the planes like the Maule and RV...

Hawaii and Pearl Harbour have all too obvious WWII connotations for an American company, but I would be surprised to see this theme being carried into Alaska.

Less cynical comments would be very welcome.... :)

 

Impressed by airports ? Why MS wasted hours programming airports fingers when you can't use them ?

 

Why MS wasted lot of time programming airport ILS when you can't use them ?

 

Then cockpitless WWII planes came, that was the cherry on the cake.

 

I am not cynic, I am speaking about facts, sad facts.

 

Just to make few examples but there are dozens of these facts-statements ready to be released and they have no cockpit at all.

Why MS wasted lot of time programming airport ILS when you can't use them ?

 

The ILS works perfectly fine.

 

EDIT

Useless rant removed.

 

The ILS works perfectly fine.

 

Just to clarify, the ILS works fine if you buy a properly equipped DLC aircraft and can use an ILS without relying on an autopilot to fly the approach for you.

 

I mention that only because I've been shocked by how many people think the autopilot is an essential part of the ILS and have seemingly never hand-flown an instrument approach in sims.

Why MS wasted hours programming airports fingers when you can't use them?

Such things would be inappropriate for the aircraft currently available.

Why MS wasted lot of time programming airport ILS when you can't use them?

Huh! Speak for yourself, Mark. I and others do use ILS approaches, regularly, in all sorts of weather conditions...

 

I still don't understand why you are here, when it seems as though so many facets of Flight appear to displease you?

If FSX or FS9 make you happier shouldn't you just be flying those games?

 

Life is far too short for bitterness about 'what might have been', and I'm not just thinking about computer games...

Such things would be inappropriate for the aircraft currently available.

 

Huh! Speak for yourself, Mark. I and others do use ILS approaches, regularly, in all sorts of weather conditions...

 

I still don't understand why you are here, when it seems as though so many facets of Flight appear to displease you?

If FSX or FS9 make you happier shouldn't you just be flying those games?

 

Life is far too short for bitterness about 'what might have been', and I'm not just thinking about computer games...

 

+100

 

Maybe he's just trolling. I mean, saying that ILS doesn't work may mean only two things: 1) one doesn't own a aircraft equipped with avionics or 2) trolling.

 

Also, it amazes me that some people who clearly dislike Flight still find time to post on forums dedicated to it.

 

 

Cheers

He who despises.. want's to buy :-) (old Portuguese saying...)

Just to clarify, the ILS works fine if you buy a properly equipped DLC aircraft and can use an ILS without relying on an autopilot to fly the approach for you.

 

I mention that only because I've been shocked by how many people think the autopilot is an essential part of the ILS and have seemingly never hand-flown an instrument approach in sims.

 

+1

 

I am also amazed at the number of people on here who seem to think that ILS means an autopilot capable of doing an 'autoland'

 

These are probably the same people who went straight to the 737 NGX without having any idea how to actually fly an aeroplane in the first place and then profess themselves to be 'hardcore' simmers.

 

I dont have much love for Flight, but still.................

Being crirtical of something does not mean we don't like it, (take my wife for example...she loves me a lot).

 

Flight is good, not good for me, the challenges are OK but still ....what after...what I like is to be able to fly from point A to point B with a flight plan in real time weather, it does not have to be in a big iron, call me crazy but the bigger turn off for me is the little things we don't have, no car traffic, no boats and no AI traffic to look at when Flying.

 

Take Orbx for example, what they did with their sceneries is amazing, peoples flow, birds and sound will give you a VERY good feeling of immersion and that's what is missing in Flight....IMMERSION.

 

To each is own but as of now, for me, Flight is VERY sterile, I like some parts of Flight but to many things are missing in it for me to reinstall it, we'll see what the future of Flight hold as far as immersion, I may reinstall it in a couple of years....

Well, I had some rewards points on my credit card that I was saving for Alaska.

 

During the beta and up through the first month after Flight's release, I was "sold" on it. I liked the simplicity, the graphics, the performance, and the integration of missions and jobs into the game. I initially thought Hawaii would keep me entertained longer than it actually did, and I (like many others) incorrectly assumed Alaska would be an early Spring release, not a late Spring/Summer release. Long story short - I kinda started to get bored with just the islands (and lots and lots of water!) to fly over.

 

Then ORBX came along with their 44% off sale... The PNW demo actually looked better than the few screens of Alaska that we've seen so far. PNW came out to just about the same amount that I had set aside for Alaska. So... there went my "Alaska money."

 

And because I just invested ~ $22 in FSX, I got excited and I did a fresh install to clean things out. I'm playing it more and I've added StrikingSoftware's freeware Caribbean sceneries which look pretty darn good. And now that I've invested some more money into FSX and I'm using it more, I'm less excited about investing more $$$ in Flight.

 

It's been said many times (and I've said it too) that folks don't have to choose FSX or Flight. Both games can exist on my hard drive at the same time for free. No problem there. But I can't afford (and don't really want to) to keep investing time and $$$ in both. The initial release of Flight re-sparked my interest in FSX, and now the gap between Hawaii and Alaska's release has actually allowed FSX to gain momentum relative to Flight.

 

I'm not saying I won't buy Alaska. But it's not a sure thing like it would have been a month ago.

 

Well, after messing with FSX for a couple of weeks, I wound up getting sucked into the constant tweaking/downloading/testing cycle and, while ORBX looks great, found myself very disappointed with all other scenery, especially anything stock. I will continue to fly in and enjoy my ORBX purchase, and will grab ORBX NorCal when it comes out, since it covers the area I live in.

 

But, my disappointment in returning to FSX, combined with the use of antilag to allow me to set my graphics back to high/max, has brought me back to Flight. I'm still kinda tired of only having Hawaii to choose from, but it still looks great. So, I've come full circle.

 

Bring on Alaska!

Take Orbx for example, what they did with their sceneries is amazing, peoples flow, birds and sound will give you a VERY good feeling of immersion and that's what is missing in Flight....IMMERSION.

 

I just finished flying a job, carrying some passengers from one island to another in the Maule.

Interestingly, my passenger commented as I was taxiing to the runway, " hey, it is kind of unusual not to see other aircraft at a larger airport isn't it? Oh well, I guess we can go ahead and take off"...

 

I thought that was funny, and who knows may just be a teaser for what is planned down the road - the foundation is certainly there.

Such things would be inappropriate for the aircraft currently available.

 

Huh! Speak for yourself, Mark. I and others do use ILS approaches, regularly, in all sorts of weather conditions...

 

I still don't understand why you are here, when it seems as though so many facets of Flight appear to displease you?

If FSX or FS9 make you happier shouldn't you just be flying those games?

 

Life is far too short for bitterness about 'what might have been', and I'm not just thinking about computer games...

 

Because someone has to speak about issues otherwise new comers may think all these tons of golden syrup is not spontaneous.

...new comers may think all these tons of golden syrup is not spontaneous...

 

Put like that I have to agree. 'Spontaneous golden syrup' does sounds rather exciting... :Whistle: