1)My biggest wish-more real world instruments modelled. Gps's , rnav, and instruments that look like real ones-not generic hand drawn but based on real units, different makes of radios , audio panels, etc.2) Icing modelling-down to seeing it form on the wing with the different types, windshield, and all the results on performance that goes along with it.3)Eye candy: More activity on the ground -cars on roads, more smoke effects-and birds in the air-this time of year in Michigan every real flight I make is a bird avoidance issue...4) an auto tweak mode for different types of flying-e.g. a simple button to click that will load the sim optimized for the type of flying you want to do e.g.if you for instance want to fly ifr (smoothness a priority) or vfr (scenery and visuals a priority).Continual improvements in all other areas-weather, scenery, atc, flight modelling.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

>Have you tried out some of the newer FSD offerings. They have>instituted some damage modelling which works pretty well.G'day ChrisNo - I haven't -- but that seems to have gone very quiet recently. There were complaints about some things in the Navajo and the next moment there was an "update" - and it seemed to me that maybe the damage model had been dumbed down because people couldn't handle it.I am not a pilot -- but I have been saying for some time that ALL the a/c models are TOO EASY!! I simply can't believe (as a non-pilot) that a non-pilot like me could simply get in and fly a Cessna 310 ( like Dreamfleet C310) without breaking it!! :)I want an aircraft that I can't fly!!!! (or as Sammy Davis Junior (or Groucho marx??) once said , I would not be a member of any club that would have me as a member) So, as a non real-life pilot, I want an aircraft that I can't fly!!! That would be truely " as real as it gets!! "Barry

I am an employed real life airline pilot in>KATL, and have been playing FS since versions to early to>remember the names of. .OH NO!!! Not another real life airline pilot who "plays" with FS2004.Could you please tell me the name of your airline so that I can avoid it in the future -- I prefer my airline pilots to do their training through official channels . Although , I did once get a Christian prayer card when I flew with Alaskan Airlines. That was quite unexpected - something I had never encountered before -- so what do I know about what is normal!!Barry

>1. I hate sitting at airports like KLGA and have to wait for>the landing aircraft to clear the runway before being cleared>to taxi onto the runway for takeoff... In the real world at>extremely busy times, aircraft taking off are cleared to hold>for takeoff on the active runway while the landing aircraft is>still on roll out down the far end of the runway. Once the>landing aircraft has taxied off the runway the departing>aircraft is cleared to start it's takeoff roll.>>At this time FS2k4 only does this when for departing aircraft.>Meaning ATC will clear you to taxi onto the active before the>departing aircraft just before you has officially lifted off>the runway on it's takeoff roll. Actually it would make more>since to hold an aircraft on the taxiway a little longer due>to vortex issues with smaller aircraft. But like I said>before you should be able to taxi onto the active while>another aircraft is still on it's landing roll...In my version of FS9 this is allowed. I simply check the approach and taxi onto the runway. The next command given is clear for take-off and away I go.Andy b

HiI would defenitely agree to most of what was posted above.An absolute must are things like fixing seasonal CTD, ugly overcast issue, time zone issue, upper winds fixing and some smarter autogen tool (that people do not have to go renaming files to get better FPS).Otherwise my requirements also go mainly to ATC/AI-traffic, in order of importance:1) multiple runway usage (airports with non-parallel/crossing Rwy's)2) better separation of aircraft on approach3) better handling on ground after landing (mainly faster leaving of Rwy)4) speed restrictions5) holding patterns and SID/STAR's6) some non-American accents for ATC (English, Spanish, German, Russian, Far Eastern and maybe Middle Eastern).RegardsWalter

Performance improvement suggestions:1) Allow Hyper Thread Technology to work in FS. AI improvement suggestions:1) Ability to fly non-direct routes. Benefits would allow for simmers to create

Right! We need some revolutionary ideas - not just fixes. Otherwise we'll all complain about it being a patch when it's released!Some Ideas of my own.SRTM Terrain mesh for the whole world is a must. Now that there are free SRTM resources for the whole world, there really aren't any excuses for not implementing this.More accurate landclass, roads, railways and rivers for the whole world.Much improved lighting effects - clouds cast shadows, shafts of light seen in cloud holes, solar glare that doesn't appear when a mountain or cloud is blocking the sun. Improved lights shining on surfaces (any lights - landing lights, strobe lights, apron flood lights).I'm not so sure about this, but how about pay-as-you-go flightsimming? FS2006 comes free, but you have to pay your landing fees, fuel, maintenance as required, insurance, licenses ....... at appropriate rates (we're talking pennys here not pounds). The last point was probably a bad idea, but how about virtual careers in msfs? - set up a virtual airline, charge fees for passengers & freight. Land your plane on time, go easy on the fuel - and try to make a profit. Keep your customers happy - or they'll go to the rivals!We need a much better map - fully customisable for both IFR and VFR flying. The map should be generated "on the fly" using objects in the flight sim. Both IFR and VFR map should be of a similar style to those published by organisations such as Jeppeson or Aerad. A moving map display on a second monitor (or on 2nd networked workstation) should be an option.Better weather effects. In addition to what's already suggested - a better haze model would be nice - climbing out of a haze layer (and seeing it from above) should be better modelled. Thunderstorms that are truly terrifying. Icing effects that see your plane struggle for control.For graphics as a whole (and in particular the weather), a whole new approach needs to be made. I've heard of particle engines - currently clouds are made from sandwiched polygons - we need a particle engine for these really.An X-Plane approach to flight dynamics.Take advantage of 64-bit architecture.If backward compatability with 3rd party addons has held back progress in the past, it must not do so again!A commitment to patching serious bugs discovered after going gold.OK I think that's all I have to say in addition to comments mentioned above.Anthony Dyer

(1) Please have a GOOD TERRAIN MESH OF 76M across the entire world, not this nonsense of 1230 M or whatever it is MS 2004 uses.(2) Please make sure ALL aircraft have ACCURATE flight dynamics, sound and genuine and detailed panels. Right now, for example, the Boeing Jumbo Jet 747-400 has a 737 sound and cheap medium jet flight dynamics. It's hard to believe MS would first have the insight to create a "Historical" edition of FS but then not even give one of the LANDMARK aircraft of the 20th century - the 747 - proper sounds and flight dynamics!(3) Please try to pick, say 50 worldwide airports - the largest ones - and try to make PHOTO-REALISTIC scenery of them. Also, try to have the remaining default airports AT LEAST have accurate AFCADs - or accurate layout of the gates, terminal buildings, runways, taxiways and ILS frequencies.(4) As already mentioned below I believe, try to write MORE EFFICIENT CODE SO FLIGHT SIMULATOR DOES NOT CRASH with high-quality settings and runs faster. I'm sure this is possible as many freeware add-on aircraft designers and scenery designers have already tried it.(5) STOP AIMING FLIGHT SIMULATOR TO THE GAMING CROWD - ** IT IS NOT A GAME!!! ** It is a SIMULATION of real-world aircraft. You don't WIN, you don't gain POINTS, you don't kill your opponent and BEAT anyone. Make it as realistic as possible - it should aim to please the millions of flight simmers who are buying it to learn how to fly and want the real experience of flying a real airplane, landing at real-looking airports, and flying over accurately rendered terrain.For those who are not serious flight-simmers, the "realism settings" can be simply set to "easy" so it won't be so tough flying a Jumbo. For those who ARE SERIOUS - the simulation should be as real as it can get to real flight simulators at the most difficult realism settings.**I'm willing to pay more for the above features as I believe many flight simmers would too. Just make it stable and realistic - NOT a game!!!John

a) I second the call for more and better atmospheric effects: clouds casting shadows on terrian would really be very nice, virga, tornados, anvil clouds, more pronounced vertical development of clouds:( smoother VC gauges.c) shadows on VC panel, similar to 'Sailors of the Sky' which implements a really beautiful VC where shadows pass over the panel as heading changes.d) finite element flight modeling so that flight characteristics at the performance envelope edges are modeled.e) I'd like to see ice build up on the airframe in icing conditions and better subsequent degradation of the flight performance.f) VFR on top, block altitudes types of clearances.g) turbulence of greater severity in thunderstorms

Barry,Your perception is incorrect. If anything the damage modeling was made even more challenging. What we did was provide users who do not want that level of realism to "opt out" and fly without the damage modeling by making a selection in the Load Manager. Some users are not interested in that level of systems and damage realism and just want to fly for fun. So we try to accommodate them as well.http://www.fsd-international.com/team/TD_forum_sig.gif

Weather-Radar anyone !!!!??? ;)Something I would really like to see in FS2006 would be a working Weather-Radar ! There are already several good payware WX-Radars but as weather is a major part of flying I would like to see a good default weather-radar !! If that wont come in FS2006 I wont most likely buy it. Also I would like to see a better flight planning tool for IFR flights.Hopefully MSFS developers take a look at this thread :) ;)regards, Jani

There are several items I would like to see in the next version, but I'll keep it simple. I agree with improved ATC:No more zig zag vectoring! :-madSIDSSTARSSeparation of aircraft - no pileups please :-dohBring back static ATIS when first coming into rangeDynamic Ground Traffic!I would like to see ground support vehicles move on the tarmac. Moving vehicle lights on roads/highways. Space closer together than in previous versions of FS.As I said, there's more but that's my minimum wish list.:-waveJohnKPRB

Before everything else: A ROUND Earth!!

>(5) STOP AIMING FLIGHT SIMULATOR TO THE GAMING CROWD - ** IT>IS NOT A GAME!!! ** It is a SIMULATION of real-world>aircraft. You don't WIN, you don't gain POINTS, you don't>kill your opponent and BEAT anyone. Make it as realistic as>possible - it should aim to please the millions of flight>simmers who are buying it to learn how to fly and want the>real experience of flying a real airplane, landing at>real-looking airports, and flying over accurately rendered>terrain.>For those who are not serious flight-simmers, the "realism>settings" can be simply set to "easy" so it won't be so tough>flying a Jumbo. For those who ARE SERIOUS - the simulation>should be as real as it can get to real flight simulators at>the most difficult realism settings.>**I'm willing to pay more for the above features as I believe>many flight simmers would too. Just make it stable and>realistic - NOT a game!!!>For several years, MSFS has walked the fine line. Beginning with FS2K, the topography, navigation, and airport data bases were drastically improved with real world information. And obviously, these data-bases are not directed to the gaming crowd.IMO---- Leave the total airplane realism to the 3rd parties, since they are basically simulations within themselves; and the same models don't appeal to everyone. Afterall, some of these aircraft take months or a year or more to produce with a group of people that may be 1/2 the size of the MS team. And lastly, "serious" flight simmers only appear to be a small percentage of total MSFS sales. If each aircraft required six months just to get off the ground it would loose it's appeal. For instance, I havn't bought the PMDG 737 because I really don't care to thumb through the manual since my real life interest is backcountry mountain flight over rugged terrain. If I didn't have to worry about real life work & making a living, I'd be over-joyed to up my PPL ratings to a real 737 or Citation X..................... but I'm not willing to spend that time in the "sim" world, just to get off the ground.L.Adamson

Yeah, I know I can do it but what causes congestion is when ATC doesn't tell you to do it... AI aircraft need to be able to do this as well which would greatly help the congestion issue at major airports... Microsoft still needs to fix the separation issue with AI aircraft, there's no getting around that...