Update the Weather Engine with the latest technology, shaders etc etc.Like everyone else further enhance and update the atc system and ai aircraft. Jonas I love your idea man I would love to go back too say 1977.

Hello Jonas,I'd have to say that's a really intriguing idea however... the dataset of airways, navaids, and scenery that reflects the current world is already a large amount of data. But then to collect data on historical airways and navaids (not to mention building 3d models of airports as they looked in the past) would exponentionally increase the amount of data that would have to ship with FS11. Additionally, you'd have to have a historical research team collect historical data about any given airport, navaid, or airway which in itself may not be as easy as researching historical aircraft.

Joshua,Yup, the idea would likely mean a grater hard disk footprint, no doubt about that. However, HD size is increasing every year while the prices stay in the reasonable range for most of us. Personally I keep a separate HD (300GB) just for the sim (not very pricy and it makes life sooo much easier, keeping it clean and defragged) and I would definetly consider getting a bigger one to accomodate a feature like this. Having one or two TB disks won't be unusual within the next few years. Let's say FS11 comes out in 2010, supporting this feature, we will probably see 2011 or -12 before the amount of available "vintage scenery" starts claiming loads of HD space. ACES, feel free to correct me on this one, but I doubt that airways and navaids require all that much space to begin with. At least not compared to scenery.Actualy, going back in time would likely put a somewhat smaller strain on the sim as the amount of AI, navaids, airport size etc. decrease. This could even be one way of keeping the framerate up while still having a pretty world to look at!You might be right about the difficulty involved researching navaid and airway placements (etc.) back in time but, actually, most of it is pretty well documented (at least in the western world) so it could definetly be done. Providing the idea is successful this would open up a sub-market for 3rd party developers, making research a sound investment. Just speculating here of course...Cheers/Jonas

I can't understand how ATC knows I am 30 feet under my assigned altitude when I am at FL300 and 120 miles from the center...

Dont know if this has been suggested before as this is now such a long wish list. However, my overall preference would that the autogen (trees and buildings) is far less cartoon like. A degree of suptle bluriness to the scenery buildings and autogen or rather less definition and better blending with the texture tiles beneath would be great.When looking at photos from real-life aircraft the land below is far less defined than in FSX. Don't get me wrong I am not against high definition base textures, it is just that the autogen buildings and trees just seem to sit vaguely on top of the textures without really blending in.Perhaps some artist out there can do something with the existing autogen textures to improve this unrealistic effect, without having to wait for FS11?Once flying I prefer the effect with autogen off, but when below 500 ft or on the ground the sim is less realistic without autogen (especially trees). Perhaps another good compromise would be to only gradually display autogen below 500-1000Ft, which would also help with fps and smoothness when flying.Well thats my pennies worth.Regards,Stuart

I note there are a few suggestions requesting more human activity/people in the sim...Given that Microsoft Train Simulator II is created on the MSFS platform, I see no reason why their improvements in the area of "Animated Characters" cannot be implemented in the next version of FS.For more info on the above, go to...http://tsinsider.com/Articles/AboutTS2/Characters.aspxCheers,Chris Porter:-outtaPerthWestern Australia

Five things, please:1. Maintain support for Windows XP2. Make full use of multi-core CPUs3. Fix popping autogen4. Better ATC and Flight Planner/Map5. Better support for third-party community with SDKs and tools

What I hope to see in FS111. Improved performance. (New game engine that takes advantage of multiple cores, graphics card processing power and possibly physics cards.)2. Improved or overhauled ATC. (SIDS/STARS, better handling of AI traffic, different accents for controllers around the world)3. Improved Flight planner. (LIKE FSNAV) Actually just buy the rights to FSNAV and stick it into FS11. Since he is no longer developing it, you could probably get it cheap.4. Solid cloud layers. (Like in FS3 and FS4. When you are above a solid cloud layer you can

I'd like to see Tile Proxy in the game, but with autogen. Current tileproxy near landing looks stupid...no trees, no buildings. WHy can't FSX use it's own up to like 1,500 feet then load tileproxy? Sunlight still looks cartoony and not HDR looking like Assassin's Creed.

All I would say for this is... a total re-write of the over arching software is probably required.. And also to make sure that once it's in a suitable state to publish something quickly to get sceneries and previous FS addons compatible. 1 - I'd like the environment created to be able to support weather radars.2 - AI that's a little bit more intelligent, so it queues properly, and gets going more quickly.. I never fly with AI as a result of it's poor management and how annoying it can be.. Such a waste when we can have busy airfields with Traffic X etc.. I'd like to see better ground control.. Taxiing that's quicker.. permission to take off before you even reach the holding point.. etc.. I know that's probably a tall order..3 - Better behaving AI.. Heavy jets that look heavy when they take off.. etc..I don't really have issues with FSX visually, it's mainly AI management and efficiency of code..CheersCraig

Somewhat on the same lines as what Craig said...FSX visuals optimized to be framerate friendlyBetter AI engine that can handle the addon traffic - more FPS friendly optionsMore "live world" features with increased animals, birds and all that stuff, improved FPS friendly traffic and boats, add AI gliders and ultralights.Improved weather engine to be more FPS friendly and more realistic - including adding Ridge lift and Mountain Wave effects

All of the above but most of all, a sim that everyone can run fluidly without the expense of upgrading, please?

my wish list?1. taxiway and runway aircraft designator.-this is similar to parking designators, only, you can assign what size of aircraft can use a specific taxiway. also you can assign what aircraft size can use a specific runway for take-offs and a different size of aircraft for landings (given rwy 9-27, upto small jets can take-off at rwy 9 and only GAs can land on rwy 9; only GA's can take off on rwy 27 and no landings. currently, heavies can taxi alng a very narrow taxiway (intended only for GA's) and sometimes land on a 1500m runway.2. more logical taxiway system-whoever is nearer the taxiway should be given priority. currently, first aircraft to be given the taxiway direction holds the authority to all the taxiways it passes. for example, plane A just exited the taxiway and asked atc for parking. it was given taxiD (100meters long) , taxi C (800m) then A 400m from intersection to parking; then atc instructs plane B to hold short runway via taxi A (150m), then B (200m) then E. both of us are going to use taxi A, both planes taxiing on opposite directions but head on). but since i got instructions from atc first, atc holds plane B. but i am still 800 meters away. although plane B is just 150 meters to reach taxiB. and when i reach taxi A, i cannot continue because plane B's nose is blocking my path. if atc would have instructed plane B not to stop, since he is nearer to taxiB, then there wold be no problem. by the time i get to taxiA, plane B would already be up in the air. (see image)-when taxiing planes are crossing a runway, once the departing plane or arriving plane has past that intersection, the crossing planes could be allowed to continue taxi or to cross (not wait until the plane has reached 500 ft or has exited the runway, unless another plane is arriving. departing planes can always wait.-when a taxiing plane, crossing a runway, is within 100 meters of that runway, it should not be stopped from crossing the runway when a plane is cleared to land or take-off. what happens is that the system reads the center of the plane as it's position. if a plane crossing a runway is within 100 meters, this means that if the plane is to stop, it's nose would likely already be a few meters or even in the runway path. so what's the point of having it stopped. by the time a cleared plane touches down or lined-up for take-off, the crossing plane would have already been 100 meters off the runway if it wasn't stopped by atc. most of the time, i see planes stopping in the middle of the runway just because it's center of gravity hasn't crossed the runway center yet.-currently, AI is directed to the first intersection when taxiing. but isn't it more logical and realistic that the straighter line is better. if an airport has several intersecting taxiways, AI's and user planes taxi on a zigzag route turning on every corner rather than traveling on a straight line. 3. one-way taxiway.there are times when atc instructs planes to use an active runway as taxiway (which in real life does not happen to specific airports); particularly the taxiway where planes are exiting. this would also be helpful in easing traffic flow especially to airports with complex diagrams of taxiways. 4. more logical runway exiting system.-when an AI lands, it already knows where it is to park even without ATC. try removing the red nodes beside the runways, AI will just go and park without requesting from ground. so basically, the system already knows where the plane's route to parking is. the problem is when a plane lands and there are planes crossing the runway and exiting planes head on nose to nose with crossing planes. the system already knows where each plane is. if a taxiing plane is already in that taxiway, then the exiting plane should exit on the next taxiway available or on the opposite side.-it is ok to find arriving GA's make a Uturn in the middle of a runway once they have reach taxi speed. but 737 making a Uturn, much less a 747? i think all on airports with no taxiways (or rather the runway as a taxiway), jets should first go to the end of the runway to make a Uturn because that's where the platform for turn are or there can be a node in the afcad for uturn where in small airports they have it somewhere 3/4 of the runway.-increase (maybe make it adjustable) hold short limit. currently i think it's set to only 68 meters. if you have strong crosswinds, landing planes could hit the nose of a holding plane.5. better AI performance.-it's really annoying to see how the AI's make a turn. it is so abrupt and shaky, more magnified on heavy jets. i wish they could make it smoother.-increase braking distance (or collision radius???) between AI's on the ground. most AI's stop too close to each other during a hold.-in intersections less than 45 degrees, atc should wait until plane is 100 meters off intersection node before allowing another plane to continue taxi. this way, there wings don't catch each other.6. a button to designate the time frame before a plane disappears due to inactivity.7. i'm not really a fan of those moving cars or people or moving gate bridges. so i don't really care about these areas.8. make autogen houses in Asia smaller.

lfeSome of what you describe, is due to airport scenery design rather than any failing of the AI or FS. The heavies making stuttered turns, for example, can be finessed using nodes on the taxipath. So too can exit and runway crossover behavior.Problem is, all of that tweaking takes a lot of time to design, and so that is why many of the problems you describe are so prevalent at so many airports in the FS world.

lfeSome of what you describe, is due to airport scenery design rather than any failing of the AI or FS. The heavies making stuttered turns, for example, can be finessed using nodes on the taxipath. So too can exit and runway crossover behavior.Problem is, all of that tweaking takes a lot of time to design, and so that is why many of the problems you describe are so prevalent at so many airports in the FS world.

well if it's scenery design, how come it happens even to default sceneries? and how could atc allow a 747 use a 5meter wide taxiway even a grass taxiway? how about a 777 landing on a 1500 m long runway when there's a 3000 meter long runway. and GA's landing on the longer rwy rather than the short runway. how about planes holding in the middle of the runway because atc just cleared another plane to land or take-off. i don't think a lot of what i mentioned has something to do with scenery. FS has set of rules that ATC and AI has to follow and that's what's causng all these inconsistencies.well maybe my comments on AI's are more on the AI designer's issues. but majority is on FS's system of logic.