Ive never added up the total cost, maybe I dont want to know. ;-) But, if you count the cost from he first version you bought, after all, its all part of the same Simulator. Then, I'd have to figure since Bruce Artwick owned it, including his addon's... With a new version coming out every couple of years since about 1982, plus the computers we've bought to keep up with the FS, could have been flying in a real aircraft... But back in the beginning, didnt have the time. Now that Im retired, and have the time, cant pass the physical, so gotta just keep flying the sim...My wife says with what Ive saved in rental fee's, we bought our Motorhome!

>ALl xplane needs is the support of the developers to make a>great addon like the LDS767 or PMDG744 and i would never>return to the unrealistic flight environment that we have in>FS9.>At the end of the day FS( is a pretty poor simulator of flight>itself and that is its biggest letdown.>SLow gauge refresh rates and its poor aerodynamic model.>Personally if MS threw the whiole thing away and started again>with an x-plane like aero model we'd be a lot better off.I own X-Plane and have used the demo's for years. My real flight enviroment is the mountains of the Rockies, and X-Plane just doesn't do it when it comes to accurate topography. There are a few photo-real sceneries, that look good, but very limited. Where I get the feeling of real flight over territory I know, using FS9; X-Plane usually turns out to be a curiosity "bummer".And, quite a number of 3rd party aircraft for MSFS beat anything available for X-Plane. Both in "flight dynamics" and cockpits with working accessories. X-Plane doesn't have near the effective rudder, slip/spin qualities of a RealAir Simulations Marchetti 260, or the Reality XP avionics included with the recently released Dreamfleet Baron.I don't see much real hearted 3rd party developers jumping to X-Plane, until versions become more compatible. Within just a matter of weeks, or a few months at most, a new version will make a previous version in-compatible. And this problem, has gotten many aircraft developers into a tizzy fit, because what worked yesterday, doesn't work today! :-roll X-Plane also needs a new higher detailed scenery database, which has been promised for months. It needs an improved airport, runway, taxiway data-base, as well as a consistantly working navigation data-base.When I can perform a good simulation of real life aerobatics in X-Plane, then let me know....I can already do them with MSFS. So much for those overstated "flight dynamic" myth's of X-Plane, which have persited for years.L.Adamsonedit: repair a word, even though I don't have spell checker.And to Darren; nice photo's on your website link. I kept some.

The ability to fly on Mars-with experimental aircraft (SpaceShipOne), similar to X-Plane.

I agree-using the MS Speech API. Vista optimisations-ability to use DX10/Vista graphics effects and the new Vista technologies.

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!There can be scrolling of a 2D panel, and panning to the overhead/throttle quadrant etc... If you gave the Seneca V from ROTW and the ATR-42-500 a try, (both freeware for FLY II), you might change your mind about "2D postcards". The scenery can't compare for many parts of the world, but they were just about "there" with what's possible for interiors. Not that it was executed very well in some default aircraft, but...Best Regards, Donny:-wave

Donny AKA ShalomarFly 2 ROCKS!!!If I am not mistaken there is a program that takes NORAD data and plugs it into a real time ATC simulation. Why couldn't such a program run on Vatsim or IVAO? There would be a certain amount of planes, "thinner" than real life to avoid endless holds especially in bad weather. Controllers could direct AI, if there were none AI ATC controlling/separating AI and human pilots. If it could be made to work, everyone would be much happier. If a certain number of human flown aircraft are bound for certain airports, AI could be diverted or "disapeared" discretely. Or designated real world or ficticious charter flights could be flown by AI until a human wants to step in, something like the Falcon 4.0 aproach for a civil sim.Best Regards, Donny:-wave

1. Better framerates ( :) )2. Better scenery objects

Wow what a cool idea Donny

What ever happened to FU3. Does anyone know how to contact the owner?

I like the idea of improved lighting effects

1) A benchmark module included. One of the big problems is that everyone report problems and performance levels based on their own perception, I think we need something that is uniform across all the software and hardware configurations (some kind of FS specific 3DMark).2) A reworked autogen engine, with realistic landclass, streets, vegetation, objects and buildings management.3) Better utilization of hyperthreading and multi-cpus computers.4) No more shimmering or blurry textures. Better use of the antialias technologies, in objects edges and textures.5) Better texture definition and realism when flying low or on the ground.6) No need to work with the .CFG files, just give us a powerful control panel and a backup option.7) Clouds casting shadows.8) Reflections on the water and wet runways.9) Better coastlines and realistic water effects.10) More varied and rich terrain textures.Best regards,

nice idea but in practice one cancels the other. Better objects reduces frame rates. A simple law of physics

point 6 is the one I like. Ease of use.

Peter,I understand your point. For me, flight simming is a combination of factors: world rendering + flight accuracy. Personally, I don't like to fly in a jagged, cartoonish or blurred world, the environment is also part of the simulation and is something that I think must not be sacrificed in favor of frame rates or high end physics a la x-plane.Both things must evolve in an equilibrated way, they have to coexist to recreate reality in the best possible way, they need each other. There are other alternatives for high accuracy flight simulation.I fly online with VATSIM, I really enjoy a full instrument approach on a stormy night, with real traffic doing holding patterns and others missed approaches, getting crazy on the cockpit as I follow the checklists and jepp charts, control my 727 and talk to the ATC. But when things calm down, I almost feel I'm dreaming when I swim into those fantastic clouds formations on a sunset, find my way through great valleys and canyons or when I see the caribbean seas colors on a sunny day.I admit my list was very "rendering" oriented, but I didn

Peter That would be a great idea get the rights to the old FU3 and bring it up to date to suit the latest techology and graphicsPeter