gotta jump in on this. in general there's nothing wrong with the default aircraft. i fly 'em and like 'em. i'd say they probably fly better than most add on aircraft as far as them being able to run on most peoples machines. how many add on aircraft will run as smoothly as the defaults on most peoples computers, generally speaking? where can you get as many aircraft in one package with decent virtual cockpits and good frame rates or smoothness? gotta remember the above before ya start screaming. if i'm not mistaken FS is for the general public...hello? the majority of the defaults fly just fine for me. if people have problems flying them, consider all the add on scenery, aircraft, etc that they probably have installed too. that in itself can slow things down and make things not work correctly. sure, there are better add ons but that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with the defaults. for that matter i'm sure there are simulators out there that would make some high end add ons look lame but that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with those add ons. same way with the defaults, in and of themselves they are fine. depends on what and how much you want. william

Here's a closer look for you:Default 172 VC FS9:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156220.jpgDefault 172 VC FSX:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156221.jpgDefault KingAir VC FS9:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156222.jpgDefault KingAir VC FSX:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156223.jpgDefault Lear VC FS9:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156224.jpgDefault Lear VC FSX:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156225.jpgDefault Caravan VC FS9:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156226.jpgDefault Caravan VC FSX:http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156227.jpgSomething I **REALLY** like in some of the aircraft just like 3rd Party aircraft - CLICKABLE POP UP PANELS!http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/156228.jpg

I have like four or five add on aircraft for FS9, freeware, and I fly them from time to time, but I stick to the defaults most of the time, and I like them.So the "facts" aren't exactly true. They aren't a waste because I use them.

I will just add one thing that Ive found, and by the way, I find it to be Excellent too-I can see no noticeable difference between running in the VC and 2D cockpits. Seriously, and this is on a 2.1 processor with 1 gig of RAM and an aging geforce 6600 GT 128 MB card.For more exact settings, go to my site at www.freewebs.com/flightsimshowcase and click on the FSX page.I can only hope that somehow the FS team has found a way for VC's to be as fluid for 3rd party aircraft too, because I am amazed at how well the VCs run on my system.

Great post Carmine...I'm glade to see they did something with the Lear45... :-)

>and I find it bizzare when the FS team feels insulted when>people like myself make comments about the default airplanes>being basically worthless for the most part and how they>should spend their time making the game itself better. I>wonder if they ever fly them? I see it this way, who of us serious flight simmers ever really expect anything like an add-on level of detail from the default aircraft? Most add-ons that do have what you seek cost at least half the price of the whole sim so why in the world would the put that much into the default aircraft? I know that the market is geared towards the casual user, one which does not know the difference anyways and perhaps could care less as long as the aircraft looks like a real aircraft. These users number much more in revenue than we could ever achieve. What I want from the team is the ability to create a plane in greater and greater detail, not a great default aircraft to use (something I never do and will never do). Best,Randy J. Smith

<>How can they leave a bad taste for first time flyers when first time flyers have no frame of reference?Chill man. How many default aircraft are there? A dozen or more? (I forget). The WHOLE SIM costs what only two typical add-ons cost. For the defaults to be competitive, the sim would have to cost $300.00 or more and the hobby would shrink drastically!The defaults are FAR from worthless.Regards,Jim

To be honest your concens along with Water Mango's are to do mostly with ATC and SIDS/STARS. Sorry but not everyone who plays FS are bus drivers.Water Mango keeps going on about how the graphics haven't improved much yet there's a steep hardware requirement. Water Mango, to you I say BS. You must be blind because clearly FSX has vastly improved graphics over FS9. After playing the DEMO of FSX (which is not the finished version), then playing FS9, I can't believe how simple and empty FS9 feels in comparison to FSX. This is considering the Demo has horrible blurry texture issues and misplaced autogen, along with incomplete coastlines.I know that FSX once available on the retail shelves will be several generations ahead on FS9, especially when updated to take advantage of DX10. Hey, you don't have to buy it, but at least I know you'll be missing out.James

That's most interesting because from what I've gathered from these forums the vast majority of simmers will definitely not be holding off purchasing FSX. Funny that I haven't encountered 1 FSX beta holder that is considering holding off.James

Don't worry, ignorance is bliss as they say.*sigh*James

Keep in mind that the Beta is actually old code so the King Air and Mooney may well have been updated for the final release.Just a thought...James

Its worth the $70.00 to me. From what I have seen. Im not going tocomplain about every bolt and nut missing. They have done a lot that I like over FS9 so I'm happy.:-)

This happens with every release.Nobody is forcing anyone to buy FSX or stay with FS9.We all have our own opinions and choices.But, to make the statement - "I'm holding off and many of my friends are doing the same. I know simmers all over the world and this is the general consensus."I just can't see this being accurate. Sure, in your group of friends,the consensus is to hold off. Fine - that's your choice.I'm sure there are other "groups of friends" that will buy FSX.Where does the majority stand? Will more stay with FS9? For how long?Sheesh - WHO CARES !!!!Eventually, as has happened with most of the FS releases, the majorityof people will buy (enventually) the latest release.Folks - it's not a moral decision - it's not a right or wrong.And by the continued statements to say "don't buy" ... "I'll stickwith FS9", etc. please don't think you'll be able to pursuade the masses to stick with FS9 and not buy/support/puchase FSX.JerryGP.S. Rant over ... apologies.

I like what you have to say and would like to subscribe to your newsletter. :(

>Great post Carmine...>>I'm glade to see they did something with the Lear45... :-)This is good to see; guess I'll be using it until Eaglesoft comes out with the FSX version of my Citation X. Actually I will still fly all of the planes in FSX especially if the VC performance is as good as I'm hearing.This will keep me busy having fun flying, until all or most of the addons I own are released for FSX. P.S. I will be flying FSX at the settings that they default to upon installation; minus maybe changing my resolution to 1600x1200.I will also continue to fly FS9 with sliders full right as well.Best of both worlds in my opinion.I'll be buying FSX Deluxe when it ships; along with the majority of simmers around the world. :)