Hello there "Freff" I like some others here have to ask if you have any idea of how much work it would indeed take to add the above to something like Flight Sim at this stage? What you are referring to is now "built in" to some of the newest Video cards via additional instructions in each GPU's instruction set. You need two cards to do it and both cards have to have the instuctions built in them. Thus allowing one card to perform the math for things like flight dynamics and the other second card to "do" the rendering. But the above would have to be added to both the games code and added to Direct X's API as well. In other words it is NOT a "simple" thing to do. The core of an app like flight Sim is something to behold it is truly an art to perform all the the low level tasks with all the needed math that has to be done and then to get the apps internal task switcher to alot each and every task (and their are a LOT of 'em)it's time to do it's thing, all without breaking anything else is again simply amazeing.EVERY time I run an app like FS I just shake my head a little as it does it's thing and "simply" gives us what one sees on the screen. Dan Martin Team Flight Ontario.

It was me.

Go search and find my post about this. We looked at it but it really won't help much. Just because it says "physics" doesn't mean flight physics (unless of course you want your aircraft to fly like exploding zombies. )

thanks for the response.

It definitely means no exploding zombies are going to be in FSX. Darn! :)

Hi, Peter and everyone.You are not alone in your quest of better Flight modeling / dynamics. I think every self respecting real Pilot that desires a more realistic simulation experience would see, and having a difficult time ignoring, some of the errors in the flight dynamics.While I agree that MS had made changes to this area, in every version, not all changes were for the better. It is my opinion, and many other developers that seek a realistic model, that from MSFS2002 to MSFS2004 in some ways things were changed that actually made realistic modeling more difficult. I, personally, had a model in2002 that was somewhat acceptable in Slow flight, Spin and Cruise but with 2004 / FS9 I was not able to achieve the same result in one single file combination. To get all three phases I ended up with at least 2 models, one for Cruise, the other for Slow flight.I am not sure to what extent MS has control over the Flight dynamics development? I

Hi,Flight models have been sacrificed. There used to be a prop effect on the elevator, for example. That has been removed. This keeps taildraggers from getting up off their tails as fast as they should on takeoff (ironic when FS2004 added so many!).Hope this helps,--Tom GibsonCal Classic Propliner Page: http://www.calclassic.comFreeflight Design Shop: http://www.freeflightdesign.comDrop by! ___x_x_(")_x_x___

And you wouldn't believe the work it takes just to get the math to work properly, given that you are taking an analog system and converting it to digital. Certainly going from 8 bit to 64 bit number representation has been extended, but it's still not perfect. You cannot represent every number digitally, so roundoff error and lots of other issues crop up. And that's the simplistic explanation from somebody who doesn't really know what he's talking about.Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com/FC_StartJava.html] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)