What is wroung with MSFS and how could it be better? As many here I am a real world pilot and as such we tend to be very picky sort of people from what we expect from our sim.Always comparing what is real to how the sim depicts that reality.MSFS is without doubt a visual feast. Without going into names of third party developers in clouds, terrain aircraft etc, with their hard work that visual delight is even more real more as we see it in our real skies.The only drawback with that visual feast is that to see it to the full is a constant battle of frame rates and stutters sliders and editing for all but the super computer owners.Here I move on to FU3 (Flight unlimited three) No longer in production and limited in its terrain coverage.FU3 was way ahead of its time not in its cloud visuals but in its dynamics, the way FU3 depicted the airmass.Those who used it can remember only to well the frontal sytems,living frontal systems with weather changing before your eyes.Thos who used it can remember ridge riding with mountain wave and that uncanny sensation of being in a moving changing airmass.In the dark on an awful night departure with thunderstorms and icing I can remember taking off in the little beech jet with engine anti ice on.I can remember going IMC and feeling the turbulence and winshear intensify. Staring at the radar screen and as you approached feeling the angry air and hearing the rain rattling down. Too close and the windshear was awful letting you know that you were in a cell.Then the screen was filled with a blinding flash of elctrical discharge.FU3 was very immersive with trips into the FBO and flying challenges to compete with the weather system.Okay in the day the clouds were poor visually but the dynamics were great.MSFS with all it visual beauty for me is still lacking a soul and maybe dynamics are that soul.Something which bugs me as the cause is hard to pin point.So my own personal plea for FS2006 is not for even more frame rate crippling detail but for a whole new weather system and a complete look at the dynamics of the sim.Am I wroung???Peter

Better flight/air modelling has been requested by users for years. I really hope they do something about it for the next FS.However I also feel that the graphics engine needs to be updated. It's not just slow because it produced realistic visuals - it's also slow because it's outdated. It relies to heavily on the CPU and uses mostly the DirectX7 feature set (Geforce256 era). With a more up to date engine it would both run faster and look better on modern hardware. This would offload the CPU for other things (like dynamics!).

Depends on people computer system what the frame rates will be. I built my own and it runs all my add-ons easily at 20+.Mike Brown

As far as sims go, Microsoft's flight sim and the other sims I've used on my computer in recent years quite frankly make me wish one of them would get FAA certifications to replace the ancient and finiky programs FAA flight sims have. Anyone that's flown a Frasca 142 sim can surely tell you that the physics of that $60,000 sim leaves much to be desired compared to MSFS2004.I do feel that there is room for improvement, however. Better handling of floats on the water would be nice, I've never personally done it, but growing up in Alaska I've seen them lots of times and I know they drift in the wind and will coast quite a ways farther than the sim lets them when you chop the throttle. Weather is a tricky thing to model as we still don't really know much about it on a scientific scale. We can predict it fairly acurately in our minds, but we can't precisely meassure rates of change.----------------------------------------------------------------John S. MorganReal World: KGEG, UND Aerospace Spokane Satillite, Private 130+ hrs.Virtual: MSFS 2004"There is a feeling about an airport that no other piece of ground can have. No matter what the name of the country on whose land it lies, an airport is a place you can see and touch that leads to a reality that can only be thought and felt." - The Bridge Across Forever: A Love Story by Richard Bach

Maybe a sim with Fly!II flight dynamics, systems and panels, MSFS addon flexibility and aircraft graphics, FU3 weather, X-Plane smoothness, IL-2 VC, Half-Life 2 scenery graphics and GTA Vice City humour...-

OyvindThere is a saying and I cannot remember its Author s name :-)"Aim for Perfection and while you will never achieve it you will at least end up with something better than you had".There are many developers who are very clever and talented people who follow those principals to make our sim better because they are always trying to improve the sim we have in our hands.Yes each of the sims you mentioned had their strong points but realistically we now have only one major sim.All our eggs are in one basket so we have to rely on the talented team at Microsoft to prioritise what they consider the weak areas of the existing MSFS.I hope its not just in the visuals but in the real soul of the sim that they look at for FS2006.CheersPeter

I think it would be perfect if they would fix the problem where you can see AI plane position lights through clouds. :-)

>Oyvind>>There is a saying and I cannot remember its Author s name :-)>>"Aim for Perfection and while you will never achieve it you>will at least end up with something better than you had".I think this is the saying:"Aim at perfection in everything, though in most things it is unattainable. However, they who aim at it, and persevere, will come much nearer to it than those whose despondency and laziness make them give it up as unattainable.--Philip Dormer Chesterfield"Andy b