>...... and no one individual>should be allowed to dictate the individual rights and>freedoms of others, certainly not when it comes to a trivial>matter of toy airplanes modified for personal use.My,my, what pompous words pertaining to such trivial matter as toy airplanes. > Mr. Visser

Any developer that would even consider giving you support after you have butchered their work is crazy. Well if it was really butchered but that is very subjective left open like that. I will agree that ANY MODIFICATION that is not authorized or approved by said developer should not be supported but if my mods were not supported they would not be on Avsim and I am sure there are others. I would venture ot guess that many developers became such by *playing* with other's files. Probably best to leave well enough alone and use the product as it was intended. If you want aircraft that suit you personally, might I suggest gathering the tools of the trade and begin building aircraft for yourself. Well that might be good for you but what law are you refering to other than your personal opine or flight sim morals defined by you and those who agree with your point of view? Certainly I can touch ANY model I desire either to mess with the VC or 2d panels. What does bulding one's one have to do with moding? That would be creation and then we would not be having this interesting discussion.Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4]http://www.rawbw.com/~bdoolin/shinault/Animation1.gifCaution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)AMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |

Hi Jan,You seem to be upset. Might I recommend that you consider anger management classes? Once again you bring an ill-mannered and emotionally immature response to a forum topic, complete with childish insults and name-calling. Potential customers should consider that when they contemplate buying a product that you contributed to. Thank you for the knighthood, it is greatly appreciated and richly deserved.It's a pity that I won't be able to interact further with you Jan, and I'm truly sorry for the burr under your saddle, but you have done nothing to cause me to revise my earlier statement:"I

Greetings Randy,To clarify... My point is, play all you want. But if you do, don't complain to the developer of the product if/when things go wrong. I have seen numerous issues regarding projects I personally have been involved in where users have modified files or used files modified by others then requested/demanded the developer give them support when things didn't work out. As if it was the developer's issue to deal with. If you don't see any problem with this situation, well so be it, but I do. If in fact you don't see a problem there, maybe a dose of common sense might help.I don't recall mentioning any laws in my previous post, Randy. Nor have I defined any morals. I couldn't care less if you or anyone else wants to modify any add-on, pay or free. You are quite free to do as you please, it is your right. Have at it. Just don't cry if or when you break it. As well, respect the copyright of the developer and don't go hawking it on public websites unless you have the developers explict permission. And before you get all excited, by saying "you", I don't mean you personally. This is NOT an attack on you, Randy. In truth, it is not an attack, period, as verbally attacking others serves no useful purpose. I am simply making an attempt to clarify my previous post as it appears from your response that there was some confusion.Take for example, the Aeroworx B200, which I know you personally are familiar with. Or for that matter, PMDG products (which I believe you are familiar with as well). I think it is safe to say that these are rather complex packages, not necessarily in terms of operation by the user (though they may be), but in terms of how the developer built the entire product and intended it to function. There are core relationships between many, if not all gauges in these packages as well as modules they utilize. And now with the advent of xml code incorporated into the .mdl, there is the possibility of even more connectivity. It is quite possible that removing a VC or gauges from a panel could, in fact, produce adverse effects. Maybe even cause the product not to function well at all. Is it the developer's responsibility to support the product if this has been done? The developer designed the product to function in a particular way. In terms of MSFS, when a developer wants to create an additional sense of realism or additional functionality, it usually requires code that operates beyond the bounds of the sim . Modification of the package beyond it's "as delivered" form may very well circumvent the correct operation of that code and produce undesireable performance issues.

Crazy post!..:-lol ..thankyou so very much for the tip Bill!long live 2D cockpits!.....speaking as someone who edits everything in [email protected]

>And now with the>advent of xml code incorporated into the .mdl, there is the>possibility of even more connectivity. It is quite possible>that removing a VC or gauges from a panel could, in fact,>produce adverse effects. Maybe even cause the product not to>function well at all.That's a very valid point, Dave. Quite frequently, I've had to answer questions/complaints from folks who write, "I replaced the ____ with a _____ from XYZ.com, and now the _____ doesn't work! What's wrong! Your stupid ____ won't work any more!"Well, considering that the entire suite of avionics is a tightly integrated package, that should come as no great surprise, since the code that drives _____ is contained in the ______ that you replaced with the _____ from XYZ.com. How then is that our fault? :-violinAlso, as you said, the XML code in the model may also be a potential source of problems, moreso since it is possible for one to write code that works both ways; i.e., values read from the model can be used to drive events within a gauge... I haven't written any such code myself at this juncture, but it is quite likely that I will at some point in the future, as new ideas occur to me... :)

Ok that's more defined Dave. I just wanted to clarify that just because one does mods does not mean he is breaking any rules or even against the developer's wishes. Aeroworx gave me permission and liked my mod very much. As to support, well I agree with you of course, if it's not in the orginial work then it should not be supported..Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4]http://www.rawbw.com/~bdoolin/shinault/Animation1.gifCaution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)AMD 64 3200+ | ASUS KV8 DELUXE | GFORCE 5700 ULTRA @535/1000 | Maxtor 6Y080M0 SATA 80 GIG | 512 DDR 400 | Windows Xp Pro | Windows Xp Pro 64 |

hi. i read your post and think that what you're doing or have done is fantastic. i'm new to this simming but realise it's addictive quality and can see that what you have set up could make a real addition to the sim. release it to the world and let it fly.

ALL payware add-ons should come with an option to install the VC or not. Its so simple. And THAT should be the end of it.

Hello all,You could also create for yourself a 2D/VC hybrid...that's what I sometimes do. Let's say that you have a Cessna 310 that is a complete system resource hog. Disable the VC using your handy dandy hex editor. Jump into the 310 in the VC view and begin to take screenshots of the typical 2D views, ie forward/left, rear/right, etc. Edit those screenshots in a graphics program to allow you to make the window area of each screenshot transparent. Now update the 'panel.cfg' to assign views to show all of the screenshots you've just created. You'll now have a 2D panel with lovely views of the VC. If you really want to get cute take a screenshot from the backseat of the 310 and assign it to the 'down' view. This takes a fair amount of work but some of the VC's being created today are more than worth it. :-) Brian