JK!

 

But damn it wouldn't that be great. They ought to take the Flight skeleton (mostly dynamics) and pair it with some basic graphics. That base with their fleet all for under $150. I would be sold in a heartbeat.

 

...and now back to life.

If Carenado were to supply GA Aircraft, REX supply atmospherics and ORBX supply scenery and landclass to a new platform then that would be very cool.

 

I think it was easier developing a new Flight Sim in the days of the Commodore 64. Today it would be a monumental task to come up with an FSX Predecessor,

I just wish there would be something that would have proper flight dynamics near the threshold of the flying envelope. There are ones that come close but get out of whack when a wing stalls.

When I see threads like this: "What I'd like in a new sim - Carenado quality planes, Orbyx quality scenery, true-to-life dynamics, real-life weather, take full advantage of cutting-edge hardware, run smooth on my computer, and..., and..." I begin to see why developers are not lining up to create it. Our standards have become pretty high. I think we're going to be tough to please.

Developers have already created this simulator... I'm really happy with X-Plane, and Carenado is a part of it:

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/382432-c208b-grand-caravan-in-lorraine/

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/363657-vernon-bonnieres-sur-seine/

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/363359-in-france-with-the-saratoga/

http://forum.avsim.net/topic/350043-bonanza-flight-in-lorraine/

Blah but X-plane is far from authentic in the flight dynamics department if you ask me. Also, with made-up VFR scenery for a big chunk of the landmass...it's just not up to par with a 2012 flight sim. Yeah it would surely be a big task but it's not impossible.

Instrument upright, cheerful, responsive, and the physical conditions of the airline pilot requirements and the cadet introduce ourselves to standards.

Blah but X-plane is far from authentic in the flight dynamics department if you ask me.

 

Interesting. Did you compare Carenado FSX flight models with Carenado X-Plane flight models ?

Interesting. Did you compare Carenado FSX flight models with Carenado X-Plane flight models ?

 

I have and neither one is authentic in my opinion. MS Flight was closest to the real thing dynamics wise...which is why I recommended in my original post that those dynamics be paired with quality birds and landmass graphics.

 

Either way, we all have different preferences. For now, I'll keep spending my $ on rw flying.

If I was to do a new Flight Sim from the ground up I would start with mainland USA only. I would include a Cessna 172, Beechcraft Baron, Dash 8, and Boeing 737-800. This allows for a transition from a trainer up to the airliners.

 

From there I would expand to other regions and aircraft but not take on the entire globe on first release. This allows a focus on perfecting the software engine.

 

It would be great to include AI Aircraft and ATC so having USA only on first release makes it easier to perfect these modules in the programming.

Interesting. Did you compare Carenado FSX flight models with Carenado X-Plane flight models ?

I have and neither one is authentic in my opinion. MS Flight was closest to the real thing dynamics wise...which is why I recommended in my original post that those dynamics be paired with quality birds and landmass graphics.

 

Either way, we all have different preferences. For now, I'll keep spending my $ on rw flying.

 

Before either one of you start the pi**ing contest in relation to X-Plane vs. FSX flight dynamics: I've been underwhelmed with both at times, yet impressed with both at other times. Flight models will be as good as the developers skills and ingenuity to overcome limitations. Both have limitations, both have strengths. Can we leave it at that?

 

MS Flight was closest to the real thing dynamics wise...

 

I don't share this view. Things can feel just as whacky in Flight, and many finer details aren't modeled with any sort of accuracy. What Flight is doing is giving computer pilots around here a good feeling of flight. I just get all hot and bothered hearing folks say how "realistic" Flight's flight modeling is.

From there I would expand to other regions and aircraft but not take on the entire globe on first release. This allows a focus on perfecting the software engine.

 

That sounds like Flight :)

That sounds like Flight :)

 

In a way MS Flight but I was thinking more on the approach that Sublogic did with Flight Assignment: ATP.

 

A new release of Flight Assignment: ATP would be awesome as long as it's focus is on the hardcore Flight Simmer and realistic flight dynamics.

 

Flight Assingment: ATP was a USA only sim focused on Airliner routes. Only thing I would change is allow for the Cessna 172 and Beechcraft Baron so you can go from basic flight training all the way up to the Dash 8 for regional routes and Boeing 737-800 for domestic routes.

Before either one of you start the pi**ing contest in relation to X-Plane vs. FSX flight dynamics: I've been underwhelmed with both at times, yet impressed with both at other times. Flight models will be as good as the developers skills and ingenuity to overcome limitations. Both have limitations, both have strengths. Can we leave it at that?

 

 

 

I don't share this view. Things can feel just as whacky in Flight, and many finer details aren't modeled with any sort of accuracy. What Flight is doing is giving computer pilots around here a good feeling of flight. I just get all hot and bothered hearing folks say how "realistic" Flight's flight modeling is.

 

Agreed on all fronts. But I still stand by MY OPINION hehe that Flight, from all of the sims out there, has gotten closest to simulating real world flight.