>Of course, anything outside USA is unacceptable!>>Its an American product and if for any reasons besides>patriotic, the start-runway should be on US soil!I'm not sure if your statement is tongue-in-cheek or sincere. I would turn it around and ask why the default airport shouldn't be in the US. Microsoft is a US based company and many (if not most) of the devs are probably Americans. Regardless of any of that, I'm sure you'll be able to create your own default once you install FSX, so what's the big deal?

>Its an American product and if for any reasons besides>patriotic, the start-runway should be on US soil!Thanks. This one really cracked me up. :-lolRegards,http://www.bremmekamp.com/img/misc/avsim.jpg

>I'm not sure if your statement is tongue-in-cheek or sincere. >I would turn it around and ask why the default airport>shouldn't be in the US. Microsoft is a US based company and>many (if not most) of the devs are probably Americans. The joys of ambiguity... Take it how you want to! Personally I don't see a problem with having in the US, as I already said the developers are entitled to some pride. Why not select airport near the office? :-p I wasn't aware that MSFS was mainly sold overseas tdragger, I appreciate that snippet of info and I'd be interested to know what your biggest markets actually are (the UK is full of obsessive freaks like myself to start with, believe the Germans are a similar camp). To my mind FS seems very US orientated though, through everything from ATC to the detailed cities and the aircraft shipped with it... and I have held this view for a long time so you're unlikely to see it change (I'm a stubborn ***) ya know!

only logical. With the US market capped at under 300 million copies by the number of residents (with 1 copy per resident on average, a decent estimate for a maximum) and the entire world having 6000 million copies maximum that should not come as a surprise :)

>I'm not sure if your statement is tongue-in-cheek or sincere. >I would turn it around and ask why the default airport>shouldn't be in the US. Microsoft is a US based company and>many (if not most) of the devs are probably Americans. >Regardless of any of that, I'm sure you'll be able to create>your own default once you install FSX, so what's the big deal?Regardless of how many copies are sold worldwide, its still American.I was surprised to hear that there are more sales internationally than in USA.Theres nothing bad in FSX being USA-centrified, be it aircraft, ATC or higher detailed scenery.America is great and full of wonderful talent, shouldn't that be reflected in some of the countries output?The big deal however, is that the start-runway, is what will introduce new users, its also where all of us started when we first installed. It creates a first impression and later on, a kind of affection, such as what some of us have for Meigs.I don't mind Seattle, as there is water to the one side, city ahead, mountains and forests, so there is a lot to see thats close to the airport.If you'd really want to be "international" you could have a few default start-up depending on which version of XP/Vista you're running, so the install program detects this and places the start runway accordingly, the Ozzies would start in Melbourne, UK in London etc....

Who cares where it's made? The community that uses it is *everywhere*.One of the greatest things about FS is that you can get good, pretty accurate scenery for almost anywhere in the world. This allows you to go see things like the Aussie Outback, wilderness of Alaska and the inland sea of Africa.I think it would be good if the default flight highlighted some of that capability... sort of a way to introduce yet another beautiful place to millions of people who otherwise would never see it.As far as patriotism goes, the whole flag waving and rhetoric spouting thing has really gone stale. Pride is good but self-centered, us vs. them stuff is for the birds. I'm one American who is getting really sick of hearing slogans that say this is the best country but watching all sorts of things go downhill... and we can start to reverse that trend by reminding the world that we haven't totally lost our minds and forgotten that we're just one society in a world of hundreds of societies. There really is something to be said for being a good neighbor but it does no good to talk about it... what does good it shutting up and *being* a good neighbor. It's called leading by example... something that we'd do well to get back to.And before any of you flag waving, rhetoric spouting armchair quaterbacks even draw a breath to respond you should know that I was born in South Jersey, raised near Phili, honorably discharged from my military service, a member of the Veterans of Foreign Wars since before Desert Shield was even an idea and I've been an Eagles fan since Marion Campbell was the coach.And I make one heck of a Hogie. Now, don't talk about being great Americans, *be* great Americans.And let's go explore some really cool places that we'd never get to see without MSFS!Scott / Vorlin

Personally I like Spokane, WA. That's quite scenic and would make a nice startup flight. Washington State has so much to see and some spectacular scenery.Oh, and BTW, I'm a Brit

A tall cold beverage of your choice is the bet.Seattle - KSEA - why - because it's basically the ACES/ MS home airport - and as noted - long enough for a takeoff by the heaviest default aircraft with a beginner at the controls.Personally I prefer Tacoma Narrows but not for a 777. KBFI won't work because almost none of the newbie's have ever heard of the airport.My vote for most appropriate startup airports are KLAS and LFPG.KLAS offers very steady weather with almost no crosswinds for the newbie, and LFPG offers a big airport with plenty of room for a newbie.Though the default aircraft will still probably be the C-172 - and really inappropriate for those large airports - that is still where the newbie needs to be started.I also believe the default flight location is about the first thing almost everyone changes.

LLMZ - -1266.0 ft belw sea level - remember many of us were there just four months ago :-)

>Personally I like Spokane, WA. That's quite scenic and would>make a nice startup flight...That's a good suggestion. But, the default Spokane in FS04 has a problem that AI get stuck at the hold point for one end of the runway (I forget which end) and never line up for takeoff. Hopefully they'll fix this for FSX.

>Of course, anything outside USA is unacceptable!>>Its an American product and if for any reasons besides>patriotic, the start-runway should be on US soil!LOL! This post should get the "Stupid post of the year" award.Disclaimer:I live in USA.

I'm a little stunned here.How about creating a flight and making it your default?Yeah. That's right.---Andrew

>I think its absolutely imperative that there is NO poll for>us to vote for FS startup airfield.>>I'd like to give that choice to the FS-team, let THEM have>that privilege, it feels like their signature.>>Saying that, I do miss Meigs terribly :(NO, i demand that the default airport this time is EKRK, anything else is unacceptable.

Was there not an old version of FS which had the default flight at Oakland? I may be mistaken but somehow that has entered my mind. I think Oakland would be nice: - A US airport, the country where FS is created and a tribute to the developers; - Oakland is not too big so newbies won't get lost; - Scenery is nice with mountains and water;- There are major aiports in the vicinity to land and take off from.Just my 2 cents.

>>Personally I like Spokane, WA. That's quite scenic and>would>>make a nice startup flight...>>That's a good suggestion. But, the default Spokane in FS04>has a problem that AI get stuck at the hold point for one end>of the runway (I forget which end) and never line up for>takeoff. Hopefully they'll fix this for FSX.Runway 21, the afd file is all screwed up for KGEG. Even I had to taxi out onto the rumble strip at the end of the r/way to get t/off permission, while getting told by FSHotseat I was "moving in the city". Not a problem with RC4 as that doesn't seem to care.