>Jim:>>Just out of curiosity, have you installed UT in FSX? I haven't>checked your specific river, but it sure did improve the>waters of WV.>>Respectfully:>RTHI did download and try the UT conversion but it killed my FSX and I had to re-install. So now I'm leery to try it again.Jim

One added comment which I would like to make clear relative to the original post.My question was not what we liked most in FSX which certainly is a valid question, and in fact I think is covered pretty well by many other posts.This WAS NOT meant to be a bash against FSX in any way, or to imply that FS9 or any past version was the utopia for flight simming. I guess I should have said, "What THIRD PARTY contributions do you miss most in FSX from past versions?" Some have seemed to be offended that I suggest that anything is missed from the past, and I assure you no offence was intended. It is hard for me to believe that everybody doesn't miss something at least a little bit. Just my old age nostalgia I guess. Shoot, I miss Pro Flight 95 and 98 which I still think is a superior ATC offering to that of MS (whch darn it didn't work in fS9 either for ATC (Thank goodness for VatSim)).Yes, FSX does still leave a little bit to be desired especially with we who don't have the latest mouse trap yet, and yes it does have a lot of new neat features, of which some of us cannot fully implement yet through no fault of Microsoft. IMHO the growing pains are a little bit more severe than in past versions, but I think school is still out relative to what we will have with the evolution developement for and in FSX. I am willing to take a wait and see attitude and fly with both versions for a while and hopefully enjoy that evolution.My hope was that if enough of us who really missed something from past days mentioned it, that there was a possibility that it would return, or an equal might be developed by somebody else. (Yea, I know that with progress some things have to die, but some might also be updated to work as well if enough interest is made known.)Thanks for the objective replies. This was not intended to be a complex or controversial question.Respectfully:RTH1585368CFI

Ummmmm.Seemed to work without any problems for me. I don't remember exactly what I did, and I think there are a number of other posts regarding this. I know as was recommended, I did not implement the roads. I installed USA and Canada/Alaska. I do not have UT Europe.I, like you would be a bit apprehensive to try again. Hopefully, an updated version will be out soon.Good luck:RTH

Wasnt there an early version (pre 1991) where you could "create" or "modify" your airplane in the area of wing span, power, and surface area?Seems I remember, or maybe it was too long ago - but I could swear I recall killing hours at meigs field, flying a created plane around, or crashing it immediately. Im not sure, maybe someone can check on this....but I think it was there. Not sure the version, but I was in 6th grade then and I don't think the sim was new, im 28 now.Totally unrealistic for modern versions of the sim, but it was pretty cool back then.danon -

>I'm with you. Though I must say that I wouldn't give FSNav a>second look if FS just started to feature a map which can be>used without pausing the game. (No, not like the GPS - like>the normal map, just as a cockpit window.)Could you explain that last statement for me a little more (the "not like the GPS - like the normal map but in a cockpit window" part). Both the map window and the GPS use the same display engine, so I'm curious what you don't like about the GPS display vs the map window display (or is it just additional functionality available in the map window vs the GPS that you are referring to)?What exactly are you looking for in a map window (and don't just say what FSNav does, cause I don't know that add-on :-> ). I can't guarantee anything, but I've got a couple weeks off at the end of the month, so depending on what's needed, I might be able to whip up something :->.Tim

Hey Danon,<Sounds like the experimental jet in FS4, can't remember if that required an addon or was in the base product though. I believe that was also the last version with the WWI Ace dogfight mode (although its last appearance might have been in FS3, can't remember that far back anymore :-> ).Tim

It was a jet! I remember now, and it did have a dogfight mode built in somewhere as well. I only had a 3.5 floppy drive back then, so it would have been included with the base install, dont think it was an addon. Man, what fun that was.....thanks for the help remembering....

It doesn't have it anymore? arggh..first was lack of snow/rain effect on windshield and now this. I am getting less and less enthused about buying this thing.

FPS

FPS again...

Actual random failures that is controlled by a percentage as in FS95.

I miss the traffic.... to have decent fps, i have the traffic way down. I used ultimate traffic with FS9Vern

>The nice/more realistic looking snow and the raindrops on the>wind shield.>Me too.

So far, implementation of secondary monitors for things like the GPS, throttle Quadrant, Radio Stacks etc.Hopefully, new hardware will improve this feature.They zap framerates so badly, that I cannot leave them displayed on a secondary monitor in FSX like I do in FS9. I usually had FSNAV displayed on a third monitor, but of course that is academic for FSX. On many third party aircraft, strange things happen as well. Main panel will not remain visable when the secondary windows are displayed, and shortcuts do not work properly. It is somewhat of an ordeal switching between panels.Part of this may be ME again, but I have absolutely no problem with this in FS9. All kinds of combinations have been possible for multiple window displays at the same time in FS9.Happy Flying:RTH

1.ability to use multiple windowed views Forward_ Right Forward_Leftfor multi monitor outside views 2.2D Panels as I use two monitors just for panels