I agree with Rayed: the flightsim offers the BEST virtual world (with near-global coverage) ever. I even said about having just one global platform in the future for many simulators that can be shared between civilian FS, combat FS, and other simulators. The first thing I thought once I installed CFS2 after installing FS2002, why on earth wouldn't they share all base scenery files, physics, textures, weather etc?? They do the same: simulate flying! They even have similar technology, file structures, and many many other common aspects. It's like having separate simulator for amphibians, just because they can land on water... At least from engineering point of view, there is no serious obstacle of having it all together (not in FSX but in future!). Again, as I said before in this post, you can have a whole product line of various simulators that add to each other and "live" in the same dimension that is something like MSFS platform. I cannot say much about political and moral aspects of having realistic damage model in flightsim, but I think if you overheat the engine, you can get in fire (and it will look great with DX10 too!:)). If you see damage done by yourself, it should probably teach you to avoid it next time. As for rockets and bombs in civilian airspace, you can always have a "protection" system that prevents you from wreaking havoc both online and offline. You want to be able to fly full-combat missions and at the same time, you should not be allowed to shoot down airliners. Well, we can have "red mode" and "green mode", meaning you have or not permission and ability to use weaponry. And the mode will be defined and controlled by server or mission. If you are flying offline and is pursuing a military career, you can fly pilotage training in green mode, and then you can engage in red mode activity, depending on mission. The same is for online flying. So the bottom line: you can "lock" user's rockets in non-military situations and "unlock" them on battlefield, without diminishing attractiveness of neither combat nor civilian part of simulation. There are also interesting "crossover" missions such as enforcing ADIZ or TFRs. Like Vatsim controller may scramble military jets to intercept a violator. It might get ugly though as many people would want to play cat-and-mouse. However, for specific Vatsim/Ivao events, this might be a good thing to have... Other things to do like S&R, many many historical missions etc will also be possible just because MSFS will have no reason not to include fine military aircraft into default hangar.Cheers,=S.V.=

I've gone on record that in a civilian sim like FS only MOA's would be where such actions should take place as an "effect" nothing more and certainly not taking away from developers time towards the actual sim. Guns and Bombs but nothing more. Otherwise its getting into War Sim and theres plenty of those out there.The reasons for my feeling of having MOA's hot is that it would provide users an option to flying and would allow for multiplayer uses. I have a strong feeling all software users know that multiplayer formats help growth of sales and use.That said, I can't wait to see what FSX will offer in this new multiplayer and role playing they've mentioned. That might take the place for those who are looking for more options within FS as for things to do.Jack