Having started flying online about a year ago, I have found it to be a very good substitute for the lacking built-in ATC. I must admit that at first I was a little bit intimidate by the way I had to connect in order for me to get online. There was a lot of programs that needed to be started in just the right way or else I would have to start all over, which could be a time consuming event. I was also a little bit worried that I might not be able to communicate correctly with ATC, coming from Denmark my first language is not English so especially at first when I didn't understand the proper language used I thought I might screw everything up and get into a whole lot of trouble. :) I have to admit though that I've never had anyone yell at me or talk to me like I'm crazy or something.Now that we are seeing the rise of two new clients for Vatsim, which will bring a much easier way to connect and is infinitely more userfriendly than the currect setup, I was wondering - what is the main reason that keeps you from using online flying? Will you try it when the new clients are released, or is there another reason that keeps you from flying online? Is it perhaps the lack of controllers in your area, or is the language a barrier?Simply put, why don't you fly online?

I just don't have the time to fly without lengthy pauses and/or time acceleration. I just don't think I would be a good online citizen with my plane stopping in mid-air every time my dog wants to go for a walk. It just isn't practical for me.

That's a great question, and in the process of answering it perhaps someone can answer any misconceptions I might have.My number one reason for not flying online is that I don't want to go back to the days in FS where I flew around in basically empty skies and took off and landed at basically empty airports. It seems like the most on-line traffic you can expect to see at even large airports is perhaps two or three other aircraft. Is there anyway to integrate the FS AI with the small amounts of on-line traffic you encounter during a flight?The FS AI is far from perfect but once you get a handle on the general parameters behind their behavior, you can have a lot of fun trying to smoothly coexist with them. And one thing that FS AI is good for is giving you is nice amounts of hustle and bustle, whether at general aviation airports (e.g., by using GA traffic) or big jet hubs (e.g., UT).My second reason is that I don't want to get bogged down on FS9 during the whole course of my flight. I like taking off and landing but cruise represents a tempting opportunity to put the plane on autopilot and go off and get real stuff done. For example, during a four-hour flight, I can spend at least two of those hours working in the garage and telling my wife, "look, I do real stuff too" (it works wonders). If I had only had to check in maybe once an hour with online ATC that would be great. Usually, I cruise on pre-established jetroutes under the control of a FMC, so it is not like my aircraft would be out of control or behaving unpredictably.

I see your point about the "boring" part of the flight, which is why I usually fly on trips that last around and hour and half or maybe two, but for me it's also fun listening to other traffic and getting prepared for the descent.As for your answer about the amount of traffic, I also wish there was more traffic. The thing is that it's kind of a catch 22...people don't want to fly online because of the amount of traffic, but in choosing not to fly they don't contribute themselves. :)You should try and look for "events", which can be seen on the Vatsim homepage, this way you are sure that there is atleast some traffic, plus fully staffed airports.I believe there is no way to incorporate AI into online flying.Has the way you have to connect to online flying been a factor also for not wanting to fly online?

I think it takes too much software and time to get connected. I cannot wait until the new version of squawkbox is released. Once that is done then I will give it another go.

Good points, especially about the special events. That's probably where I need to concentrate my attention. Thanks!

I used to Play NASCAR 2K4 on line. The problem is I am limited to dial up in my area so I would get frequent disconnects. Applying that theory to FS9, that wouldn't make for either a happy pilot or controller.

Actually I believe that they don't ask for more than dial-up, but I could be wrong. It's not really a big problem if you have disconnections, except maybe, as you say, for yourself. You should try it out sometime, it really makes for another kind of flying experience. :)

There seems to be as many reasons as there are pilots. For me, I don't fly online mainly because:1. Waiting on a simple software program that works to get me online. Not 2-3 programs. Not all this configuring. Guess it is coming... I'll wait.2. Was not impressed with the "studdering" of other VATSIM aircraft.3. A tad too "stuffy" IMHO. I understand they want and need to run it by the book but if there was a channe(s) where one could chat, shoot the breeze with other pilots while on long flights and you're just sittin' there cruisin' on AP that would be a fun way to fly AND meet new simmers.Suppose if I do try again it would be with Flight Project International (FPI), as they seem to have the smoothest system around when comes to watching other aircraft.

Reality is all in the eyes of the beholder.Picking up a clearance online from a center 300 miles away-then taking off, flying and not changing frequencies with the actual controlling agencies and frequencies that control that sector or even airport area(clearance, ground, tower etc.) that I do in real life, is less real to me than the built in fs atc.The online live part is awfully fun though-and does give an urgency you don't get with computerized atc. I tried it for about a year-then {imho only} just felt the built in is overall more realistic, and less of a hastle to get going quickly, not to mention being able to put it on pause for the million real things that interupt while simming.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

Check out the Bushnet forum here on AVSIM. :)

I'm waiting for the new software. I had a go at it a while back but just found it too cumbersome and never did get it working. Looking forward to trying though. billg

I dont fly online as i figure its just do daunting... to many rules to follow dont know proper procedures and I really dont want some guy in ATC to tell me off about what im doing... So no i will never fly online i dont see the point i prefer freedom not restricion.But if someone does come up with a online flight sim expreance that lets me basically bush pilot around with little or no rules... well what the heck ill give it a go.my 2c

>Simply put, why don't you fly online?As several others have said, last time I tried, the software was WAY to kludgy. Never could get everything running at the same time. If you say there are new, easier to set up clients coming out, I'd love to give it another shot. I'm sick of AI ATC vectoring me 30 miles away from the airport when I'm flying an approach in a catagory A aircraft. Any links to the new software?Also, never having been able to connect to VATSIM, I do have a question about etiquitte. I rarely if ever fly airliners, FS is all about general aviation to me. Say I were to depart Farmingdale, NY, with a southbound departure, and request flight following, staying at or below 500 feet just off the ocean shoreline untill Sandy Hook, NJ. (a very common procedure IRL.. Keeps you just outside the New York class B airspace.) Would this be acceptable on VATSIM, or is it all airliners cruiseing in the flightlevels?Dan

Well I get my on-line fix from IL 2. Not necessarily dog fighting but just plain flying around under bridges/through hangars, between oil rigs or formation flying.Guess I could do that in FS 2004 too but the ww 2 props are kind of made for that type of flying and the visuals are so much better and handling just feels right.