Today's Library __> no FSX uploads ....

[Paul J 349]

well, (with all due respect to the authors of these fine freeware aircraft) if you consider 29 mostly 1930-1950's aircraft with three or four modern aeroplanes - only one of which has a greater filesize than 10MB (it's an FS9 conversion at 24 MB), most being under 10 MB, and 13 by one author, and including 4 trimotor variants, 4 DH Beaver variants and 3 Curtis Condors, then I suppose you're right! We have an absolute plethora of exciting new FSX freeware aircraft to download and fly! OK - seriously - I think the original poster actually has no idea how long it takes to produce one aircraft - even at AI-type filesizes. I appreciate it takes time and effort to produce this stuff - particularly as freeware producers do it as a hobby, more than for any fiscal reward. Those files will come.As my psychiatrist says "Give it time, it will be ok - ok?"My personal need is for my three or four FS9 payware aircraft to be built, and unfortunately this looks like it's going to take a lot more time. . .It will be ok. . It will be ok. . It will be ok. . It will . .

[Mace 1,972]

>so touchy>>geesNot touchy at all. As JerryG says in this thread, you were/are TROLLING. Plain and simple.The facts are, there are many many things avail for FSX already, and the pace will only increase in the coming months.RhettAMD 3700+ (@2530 mhz), eVGA 7800GT 256 (Guru3D 93.71), ASUS A8N-E, PC Power 510 SLI, 2 GB Corsair XMS 3-3-3-8, WD 250 gig 7200 rpm SATA2, CoolerMaster Praetorian

[MillKa 0]

>This is not good.>>No uploads at all for anything FSX.>>Not good at all, no development...>>>alwell, all the other addon authors took a break, waiting for YOUR addon !but since youre not happy, i suggest you demand your money back !Sorry, couldnt resist ..

[bob.bernstein 0]

Whether you agree with the OP is not relevant.What's relevant is that the OP made a statement about developers progress while all along his hidden intent was to flame FSX. The statement is being debated by developers, but from within an fsx flame environment.Passive agressive. I would like the OP to stop hiding behind passive agressive misdirection.If you want to complain about FSX, please do it explicitly. That way I won't find myself reading such useless posts by mistake.No good comes from more complaints about fsx.Waste of time.Cheers,Bob

[Bill Womack 7]

I can't speak for others, but I'm tremendously enthused about FSX! In fact, several projects are already in the works for it. But as has already been observed, it takes time. The things I'm loving about FSX include more detailed scenery with greater capabilities, and those demand extra development hours. I'm sure soon enough we'll see the floodgates open.

[Orlaam 328]

God you FSX apologists are really something. Don't like us complaining about your precious FSX? Tough. I have no reservations about stating the fact MS released beta-ware and until I see some better performance from a patch then I'll point out the flaws.Trolling? Please. :-roll

[Guest Stoopy]

Well. That seems to confirm the agenda.

[B777ER 2,570]

I love reading this stuff as I fly my LDS 767 in a beautiful setup of FS9 that I am running currently winging my way to Berlin from JFK.

[Guest Stoopy]

I hear ya. I've either got to read, or take a nap, on those long boring flights. ;)

[Geofa 108]

..and I love hearing of your great Berlin to JKF flight as I fly my shared cockpit flight with a flight student in fsx tonight. I am truly glad you are happy as am I-that is what is all about isn't it?http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

[N2056 33]

It's too bad you take a one day 'snaphot' of the uploads to make a statement. Unless you have been on the development side of the house you really have no idea what the shift to FSX entails. A lot of things have changed, and while the change is for the better it takes time to upgrade yourself on the new tools. I agree with 67C VJPL. Be patient...there will be some really good stuff coming out soon!Robert