>Improved dynamics. If you merged x-planes dynamics with FS's>looks. You'd have a mean simulator right there.I run a few 3rd party MSFS aircraft, payware & freeware, that I consider to fly more realistically, than what I've experienced with X-Plane; and I do own X-Plane. Much has to do with excellent rudder control and aerobatics. X-Plane is generally "smoother", but they certainly don't have a real edge in "flying" better. Most of the "flight dynamics" bragging rights, is from litature that's ten years old. In fact, Microsoft had some of the best creations, flight dynamic wise, with the release of Microsoft's Combat #2. Portions of flight dynamics have gone downhill since then (happens frequently with X-Plane too) but 3rd parties have made some good improvements. L.Adamson

I think CFS 2's dynamics were so-so, and suffered from a lot of hype. The pinnacle in flight dynamics came, imho, from Fly! and Rob Young

>The easiest way for the "magic" of the sim experience to be>broken for me is to go from 50 mile visability to one mile (or>vice versa) in a microsecond.This is fixed if you use the registered FSUIPCFrom the manualSmooth visibility changes works for all weather in FS2004, but only for global weather supplied by outside programs inFS2000 and FS2002. It introduces visibility changes gradually when selected. You can adjust the speed at which the visibilityis allowed to change. (This of course does not affect sudden visibility changes caused by clouds ). This option is defaulted off,and does not occur at all for FS2000/FS2002

>I think CFS 2's dynamics were so-so, and suffered from a lot>of hype. The pinnacle in flight dynamics came, imho, from>Fly! and Rob YoungDon't dispair! :D Perhaps the "rudder" I'm referring to, actually does come from Rob Young/RealAir Simulations. I actually prefer the RealAir Decathalon for MSFS over the previous FLY version because FLY took too much time breaking into a spin.I'm into "Sport" type aircraft, and my "pinnacle" of all time, is Rob Young's Marchetti SF260. It IS the plane, that X-Plane can't hold a candle to!L.AdamsonEdit: Regarding CFS2, it wasn't hype. The airplanes DID what I wanted them to do. Excellent elevator and torqe dynamics during the ground roll, inertia and mass in the air, a good feel of weight to power. Ailerons and rudder, also worked as expected.

>For me, the best improvement that MS could make to the Sim is>to introduce a transitional change to the weather between>geographic areas.>>The easiest way for the "magic" of the sim experience to be>broken for me is to go from 50 mile visability to one mile (or>vice versa) in a microsecond.>>I understand how it happens with each weather station>reporting the weather via the real weather download setup -->but there must be someway that the weather engine can consider>the current direction of flight, the current weather at the>current location and transition to the weather conditions at>the nexy weather station in the direction of travel.>>EASY -- even my programmer son could do it! :)>>Barry I would like to see1] Advanced inhancments for SDKs for thrid party developers so they can implement things correctly like weather radars, flaps and the like.2] Higher resolution for scenery files as an "OPTION".3] Beter weather effects/windsheer etc.4] AI that do not bring your FPS to it's knees even with the best computers on the CURRENT market.5] about 1000 other things ;-)[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4]AMD 64 4000+|ASUS K8V DELUXE|SAPPHIRE ATI X800XT PE|MUNCHKIN 3200|80 gig SATA|DELL 1905FP 19" LCD|TRACKir PRO|PFC JEPPESEN MOONEY YOKE|CH PRO PEDALS|

5] about 1000 other things ;-)YUP!!!!! hear hear!So is it too late to say that I wish FS10 would have all PMDG and LDS quality AC and sophistication? **smiles**

1) 1m (or lower) resolution in scenery textures so allowing us designers to produce vivid ground textures without compromises.2) A fully functional FMS.3) Integrated VATSIM and IVAO functionalityShez

WOuld it be possible for someone other then Microsoft to create a flight simulator which would cater the needs of serious flightsimmers? Could another software company be capable? There sure are companies such as PMDG and LDS that have taken add-on aircraft to a whole new level, so why not the flightsim engine? I'm sure there is no one who wouldn't agree with the suggestions above. I thnk the main ones have been mentioned numerous times, but I was hoping to add a few more. I would like to see better effects when landing in wet/humid weather, i.e, vortex contrails over flaps/wing and wingtips. cheersTristan

By the way,I forgot to mention, that competition is what drives technology. Perhaps there is too much reliance on Microsoft for flight simulators. It's just like when Ansett went out of business, the level of service quality with Qantas dropped significantly because there was no one else to compete with. If another developer came along and produced something way ahead of fs9, is would force Mircosoft to compete. THe reason they are working on Xbox 360 is because they are contending with Sony and Nintendo, so they are forced to create something better. Ok I've raved on about this enough. But I think the progress of flightsimulator technology to a large extent depends on market competition.

I would like to see better ATC handling. All rwys active with the ability to close rwys for landings or t/o's ie KSFO close 1R/L for landing. Right now using the star method if the 1's are closed to landings you can't ask for the 19's for landing, even if the winds are between 190 and 280. Everything needs to be open. And I would like ground to taxi you to the right gate for your plane ie a ual would go to a ual gate, aal would go to an aal gate. Not just the ai.

>I would like to see better ATC handling. All rwys active>with the ability to close rwys for landings or t/o's ie KSFO>close 1R/L for landing. Right now using the star method if>the 1's are closed to landings you can't ask for the 19's for>landing, even if the winds are between 190 and 280. >Everything needs to be open. And I would like ground to taxi>you to the right gate for your plane ie a ual would go to a>ual gate, aal would go to an aal gate. Not just the ai.Totally with you John! ..that would be great. :-jumpy..re what Randy said about AI. I do not have the very best system and AI are not a problem for me ....the thing that brings my system to it's knees are cloud,clouds and clouds every time. :)

regardsEd

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v640/edetroit100/edley.gifAMD Athlon 64 3500+, 1024Mb PC3200 DDR, 300Gb HD 128Mb DDR Nvidia 6600GT PCI Express, Audigy 2 ZSCH Products Yoke, Pedals and Throttle Quadrant

>I'm into "Sport" type aircraft, and my "pinnacle" of all time,>is Rob Young's Marchetti SF260. It IS the plane, that X-Plane>can't hold a candle to!>>L.AdamsonDo this with MSFS:http://asulana.free.fr/Su-31M-PF.htmMarco

>>I'm into "Sport" type aircraft, and my "pinnacle" of all>time,>>is Rob Young's Marchetti SF260. It IS the plane, that>X-Plane>>can't hold a candle to!>>>>L.Adamson>>>Do this with MSFS:>>http://asulana.free.fr/Su-31M-PF.htm>Actually, the RealAir Marchetti SF260 for MSFS is capable of more than what I saw in that video. It does everything in the video including snap rolls, tailslides, vertical rolls, excellent hammerheads, and a very controlled knife edge. As I said, rudder authority combined with ailerons is precise, which is why it does so well with slips and holding a knife edge on a straight heading.In real life, we would not use the SF260 to the extent of a Sukhoi for aerobatics, yet the model is capable of a lot.L.Adamson

:D L.Adamson

Just adding to the thread. Nothing new for requests...1. Sloped runways2. Precipitation affecting runways3. smoother transition for weather4. Ground trafficPerhaps a couple of modes to set the over all detail of the sim when starting a flight. VFR mode, IFR mode. Or Jetliner mode and puddle jumper mode. Something that can "Set" the over all sim up for a type of flying. Might improve performance. Dave