I made an interesting discovery today with respect to aircraft config files and the

Yeah, I think the feature is a nice idea but really limited in its current implementation. And your discovery makes it worse (though easily worked around by adding "Cargo" to the type, but you shouldn't have to do that). I've submitted a couple of times to [email protected] that the ui_typerole should allow multiple attributes, so I can put in Military, WWII, Single Engine Prop, in for a single aircraft. Since when does any aircraft fill only a single role?Thomas[a href=http://www.flyingscool.com] http://www.flyingscool.com/images/Signature.jpg [/a]I like using VC's :-)N15802 KASH '73 Piper Cherokee Challenger 180

On reflection the way the type role is implemented is a nonsense, sorry there can be no other word for it. If FSX is just going to use the type role statement from the first aircraft in the first aircraft of type folder why not put the statement in the section of the aircraft config file rather than for each individual aircraft config section.My bet is that it was originally seen in a broader context but something went awry in the execution of the design. I would see much more value if I could select say all my civilian or military C130s on separate pages or perhaps I would want to see on one page all the aircraft I have that are in air ambulance colour schemes. I do not think that adding a suffix to aircraft type is adequate, suppose I have 17 B727 aircraft in my stable and 8 are in cargo colour schemes and the rest in Pax colour schemes there are times when I might to view the thumbnails of all my B727 aircraft and times I want to browse all of my cargo aircraft including B727. Then the addtition of Cargo in the aircraft name wold be adequate in the first case but would not prove satisfacory in the second case. The potential of the "type_role" statement has, in my view, been totally squandered in this implementation. John