WEATHER : - When fog is present on the ground ( when in it ), it is also present when flying above it. SCENERY : - MORE PRECISE MESH : 76 or 32m - MORE ACCURATE LANDCLASS AND AUTOGEN - MUCH MORE PARKING SPOTS AT AFCAD'S - DYNAMIC SCENERY AT AIRPORTS : PAX , VEHICLESATC : - DIFFERENT VOICE ACCENTS : AMERICAN ; SPANISH ; FRENCH ; SCANDINAVIAN ;ASIAN ; AFRICAN AND ARABIC - SID's AND STAR'sAI TRAFFIC : - NO GO AROUND's , BETTER SEPARATION - BETTER USE OF AVAILABLE RUNWAYS - MORE REALISTIC TAXI AND APPROACH SPEEDSTHAT'S ABOUT IT

It may be a good idea to look here, concerning those requests!http://blogs.msdn.com/tdragger/archive/200.../23/516681.aspx[hr color=#000000][table border=0" width="98%" id="table1" height="4" cellspacing="1" cellpadding="2][td width=500]Jason CYOO - Formerly MYNN[br /]General Aviation Fan[br][/b]P4 3.2Ghz, 1GB Ram, FX5900 128MB, XP SP2.[br /][br /]

I sent an email to microsoft.......But I just want to know what you think about my ideas

>WEATHER : - When fog is present on the ground ( when in it ),>it is also present when flying above it. THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT!!!!

In fact it is not realistic at all to see the runway from far away when it is reported that the vis is very low. And then suddenly when at 4-5 miles from the runway , it dissapears in the fog.

NO SCREAMING!!!!! IT DOESN'T GET PEOPLE TO LISTEN TO YOU AND IS HIGHLY ANNOYING!!!!!!And that is quite seriously means.Whatever merit your ideas may or may not have (and using a few buzzwords to describe an idea is not a good way to get people to understand what you want), don't shout!

Maybe he was posting from his TRS-80! Or even a C-64. ;)

Another idea for FSX :Be less US-CENTRIC. C-641MB

>Another idea for FSX :>>>Be less US-CENTRIC.>>> >C-64>1MB>And that would mean...?Since we ship the planet I'd love to know.

US-CENTRIC :ATC : American accents only , FAA way to talkAircraft : American manufacturers. e.g. : no airbussesScenery : much more developped in the statesAirspace : FAA airspaces regulations.....

>US-CENTRIC :>>>ATC : American accents only , FAA way to talk>Aircraft : American manufacturers. e.g. : no airbusses>Scenery : much more developped in the states>Airspace : FAA airspaces regulations>.....>>I think these are legitimate requests. However, design of the ATC, Aircraft, scenery, etc. within FSX can and should allow 3rd party developers to provide these features. Let the MSFS team build the "highways" and the 3rd party developers the "cars"!David

Got to start somewhere. And if you have 50% of the paying userbase happy that way and require 10x more investment to maybe please part of the other 50% I can fully understand why the investment isn't made.You'd need several hundred other systems in place for everything, which would seriously confuse most users.Every country have their own transition levels, airspace regulations, etc. etc.It confuses the #### out of real pilots too...

Well, considering the dev team has hinted that road traffic will be based on region (what side of the road etc...) why not ATC based on region?Ian.

Two different system with vastly different levels of complexity.

Hi tdragger, will there be an AI system for trains too? :D