EXACTLY. Great post Mike.Regards,Jim

Hi Scott,I own the ** WWI Bombers and Jets and think the ships are outstanding. Great graphics and I thoroughly enjoy the flight dynamics. But since I have no time in such beasts, I have no clue about the fidelity to the real ships.Having said that though, I think it would be a stretch to suggest that no other similar models "come close" to yours.But that is to compliment other add-ons not to detract from yours which are clearly among the best in my hangar.Keep up the great work.Regards,Jim

<>Just as a PS to my other reply, I note that you have now changed your tune with respect to the Baron's slip characteristics. In your post on the other thread you stated:<> So, first you said that in a slip, the aircraft should LOSE altitude AND airspeed. You will recall that I corrected you on that misconception and at least, I am glad to see that you were paying attention to me.Plese review my other posts in this thread for further corrections to your other misconceptions.Regards,Jim

What about the best business jet?(Again, only the flight dynamics are important)

Hi Rico,Light blue touch paper and run - :D I have to say I'm impressed that you haven't let yourself be dragged into the 'p1ss1ng contests' (as we say in the UK) :)Given that you have over 200 hours in Senecas, I would interested to hear what it is about the FSD model that is particuarly good. I have been messing about with the Flying Club Seneca II which I actually find spookily like the Seneca III that I'm learning in at the moment. As the Seneca is a model I'm am likely to be flying alot in the future I'm keen to grab anything that passes a good impression of one.

>Microsoft and always has been. There's a good reason why one>program has FAA certification and the other does not :) >Look here: http://www.x-plane.com/FTD.htmlThe FAA certification has nothing to do with the quality of "flight dynamics". Read more on the subject what requirements are before showing off your obvious ignorance.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

Scott if you can't shoot or have a combat scenario what's the point??? Fly around with guns and look at the scenery...I agree with what you said above but war planes work better in sims like Combat Flight Simulator 3 or something like that. I remember back in the days of FS3 there was a WWI scenario that would work well today if something like that was put into FSX. Microsoft could set aside areas in the FS world like Red Flag in Nevada or some range over in England and open the code where missiles, bombs, and guns could be utilized. Seeing they discontinued the Combat Simulator franchise they could bring back a feature in FSX long missing since the days of FS3, now WWII warbirds in FS would make since.Scott you make some good points but we need more to do in a war bird than follow Cessna's around in the sky. If Microsoft expanded on the Damage code AlphaSim's market would be on a whole other level because add-on developers could take the FS world to another level for combat enthusiast. I would love to take Alpha's new Stealth on a mission in Red Flag or do some WWII missions in a set aside area of Europe. Much like what was done to Falcon4 thanks to its add-on community, much the same could be done with FSX in creating ultra realistic campaigns and goals...The bottom line for me Scott is if there's nothing to shoot at I might as well stick to bush country flying or transporting passengers...

>Scott if you can't shoot or have a combat scenario what's the>point??? Fly around with guns and look at the scenery...>Scott you make some good points but we need more to do in a>war bird than follow Cessna's around in the sky. >The bottom line for me Scott is if there's nothing to shoot at>I might as well stick to bush country flying or transporting>passengers...Perhaps it's an age thing, since I was born shortly after WWII. But I get a lot of enjoyment out of recreations of WWII fighters & bombers, as well as 1940/50 period classics such as the four radial engine Connies. I don't need a shoot-em up sequence to enjoy these airplanes flying in the present time, or a scenario of the past. I've used numerous combat sims & enjoyed them, but on the other hand, I find it relaxing to take a warbird across the mountain and valley areas within Flight Simulator. If warbirds were not still popular, you would not see so many people attending the Reno Air Races, the Warbird section at Oshkosh, or the many museums across the world.L.Adamson

>Best Heavy Jets:>>LDS 767-300, Hands Down>PMDG 747, Close Runner Up>----------------------------------What is your reason for LDS first place as opposed to PMDG 747? Could you elaborate on this? What factor to you measure flight dynamics on? Have you experienced handling these birds for real? CheersTristan

>Show me a developer who can mimic the onset of stall in a>777-200 at MTOW with the port engine out and seized (as>opposed to windmilling), damage to four starboard vortex>generators, at 2c SAT, 3,700 MSL with rime on the port wing>causing partial seperation of laminar airflow behind the>spoilerons....and then we can talk about accurate flight>models. :-lolNobody's asking that much, of course. I think the FM-moaners would be happier with a better representation of OEI flying, behaviour approaching Vmca, crosswind/slip characteristics, and so on. :)Marco

L.Adamson don't get me wrong, FS has something for everybody. Yes in the real world these planes are still flying and present at most major airshows. In the confines of FS we don't have a Reno Air Races track with a simulated race nor a virtual area to practice dog fighting with bullets, bombs, and proper aircraft damage modeling. This is just me and I speak for only me. If I'm going to fly warbirds whether it be a Sopwith Camel or the F117, I need something to shoot at, much more than what I get flying a 747. Everybody's different and that's what makes FS fun. Scott made a comment as to why so many aren't flying warbirds in FS and I gave him my reason as I haven't purchased any combat aircraft. Now I do think RealAir has done some wonderful work on their SpitFire, it's just that it would be nice to have the situation that caused that aircraft to be built in the first place present in some way to interact with. I own RealAir's SF260 and Decathlon for stunt flying so understand I'm not knocking them or anyone else who designs warbirds for FS.Like I said above maybe there will be a surprise in the next version of FS that will take combat aircraft on a whole other level in FS... You never know...

<>Huh? He was the first to p1ss and then p1ssed again during the thread if bashing and misinformation can be considered p1ssing.The only thing he hasn't done is win the debate!(-:Jim

Ryan,after hearing that, I am disappointed. There should at least be an EASY mode and a REALISTIC mode for the PMDG 744.I would love having it fly as close to the real thing as possible. Does anybody know of a change I can do to fix this?

> There should at least be an EASY mode and a REALISTIC mode for the PMDG 744>I would love having it fly as close to the real thing as>possible. Does anybody know of a change I can do to fix this?Sorry but you seem to have no clue what Ryan was trying to say. You can't get CLOSE to real thing unless you have force feedback yokes that emulate tactile forces exactly - the only place were you can get CLOSE to it is in a $20 milion level D simulator. So if you really want the REALISTIC mode of flying this bird get yourself first hundreds of thousand of $$ worth of hardware and then I am sure PMDG will tell you how to tweak the files to get the realism you are craving for.Michael J.http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/pmdg_744F.jpghttp://sales.hifisim.com/pub-download/asv6-banner-beta.jpg

I like tacos. Crunchy or soft......but maybe the tacos Im eating are nothing like the tacos they make in Mexico....Tacos, eat a taco youll thank yourself later.