Some more:

• An option to have weather affect engine start in very hot conditions, or very cold conditions. (e.g., In winter you may have to hold the ignition switch longer, or maybe prime the engine a bit more)
• For advnaced users, priming engine affects start (e.g. priming gives better start, no priming may give a false start)
• Give the Cessna 172SP a bit more power, that thing packs a 180HP engine!
• Windshield wipers on planes that have them
• Allow the user to enter in a flight plan from the GPS

Some more...

• Volumetric Clouds. (We have been wating for this soooooo long, even very old games have this!)
• The turbulence in the clouds is already good, but it would be better if you can make the airframe shake frequently

I wish, Gman would learn the SDK become a developer and implement some of his ideas :( :(With some ingenuity a lot of this stuff can be done.Danny

I wish, Gman would learn the SDK become a developer and implement some of his ideas :( :(With some ingenuity a lot of this stuff can be done.Danny

Not there, still learning programming and texture making @ 15 yrs old. I am mainly focused on programming though, and I am not taking an 3D development classes unfourtunatly :(Wish:

• If possible, I want to see the blades spin and then speed up quickly, instead of just blurring 5 secs after startup.
• For old plans like the Piper Cub, there should be a clickable hotspot on the outside of the plane, or from inside the plane, in which you click on the propeller, simulating a person turning the blades.
• If possible make the icing a bit better, simulate window icing, tail icing, etc. It would also be nice to see some effects I see in the Cessna Mustang, in which the windows ice

[*]For old plans like the Piper Cub, there should be a clickable hotspot on the outside of the plane, or from inside the plane, in which you click on the propeller, simulating a person turning the blades.

Unfortunately, clickspots on the outside model aren't available. This was one of the FSvNext features that will unfortunately not see the light of day... :(

I think that a lot of what had been requested since this thread was opened is now available from 3rd party developers. Scenery development is limited by what elevation data or satellite imagery is available and has nothing to do with Microsoft. But many areas of the globe are already being filled in with very good freeware and payware. Also for most of the default airplanes there are payware versions that are significantly better. For every significant plane there is now likely to be a very well built add-on.I would prefer that Microsoft not waste its time making better scenery or more default airplanes when there are plenty of great scenery and plane designers out there who do a much better job. Even sloped runways are available with the extremes being Aerosoft's Lukla and LLH Creation's Courchevel. If you aren't aware of them I recommend the following FSX freeware scenery to see what I mean: Holger Sandmann's Victoria + and Grand Canyon, airports LFLE & LFKA from the LLH Creations website and the 6 Australian airports from the Full Terrain Experience website.On the weather issues, much of the requests have been already addressed with great products like REX, FEX and HiFi's ASA.What I would like to see MSFT concentrate it's effort on is optimizing performance, improving the physics engine, developing user friendly tools, making everything as modifiable as possible and let the community do the heavy lifting.The issue ACES said they had with doing multiple accents for ATC is that it would take too much time to do all the variations. But this is a perfect example of what I am talking about. All MSFT has to do is make it something that can be modified and the MSFS community will take care of the rest. Just give us an open platform to create a more complex ATC environment and in short order there will be multiple very well designed alternatives.

For the clouds to actually emit shadows on the ground (X-Plane 9 has this...)For the engine to be able to detect any aircraft surface and apply condensation and vortices effects in the right conditions.Contrail size and density depending on conditionsReally gotta work on that weather.Make the sim from scratch this time instead of building off the back of FS9.Not like we're getting an FS11 now but yeah....

deep snow? fly into bc in the middle of winter and land on a field and actually sink in like your on snow. crash effects - crashes cause engines to catch fire or a wing to snap off ect

deep snow? fly into bc in the middle of winter and land on a field and actually sink in like your on snow. crash effects - crashes cause engines to catch fire or a wing to snap off ect

The problem with that is nobody knows how much snow there will be, because only a small percent of weather stations that provide METAR, provide the amount of snow that has precipitated... unless you wanted this to be a setting set by the user.

deep snow? fly into bc in the middle of winter and land on a field and actually sink in like your on snow. crash effects - crashes cause engines to catch fire or a wing to snap off ect

It should be a flight simulator, not a crash simulator. :(

yes i understand that i just would like in the case of a crash landing to see it more then having ur wing sink into the ground like water and the screen pause.

...crash effects - crashes cause engines to catch fire or a wing to snap off ect...

This is from the FSX SDK;"visual_damage Setting this flag to 1 enables visual damage (e.g. parts breaking off) to be seen when crashing the aircraft into the scenery. Note: visual damage will only work if it is built into the aircrafts .mdl file." This would go into the [fltsim.n] section of the aircraft.cfg file. I imagine that anyone putting the effort into the model would already have this entry in the aircraft.cfg file though. Could it be that FSX already supports it but theres not enough interest from the users for the developers to put in the extra effort? Maybe it's just legacy code?

"crash effects - crashes cause engines to catch fire or a wing to snap off ect"With due respect, it seems that kids want a game arcade experience, and don't really care about flying. The very last thing in the world I want to do is crash. The thought of it makes me sick. I just flew A2A's magnificent and complex Boeing 377 Stratocruiser around the world without a single mishap. My grandson did like to crash into buildings when he was 5 though. :(

this isnt a case of weeee im 5 crash explode boom yay! i simply think in the event of such an extreme failure in which you do not make the runway, that the airplane show it. If you hit the runway too quick have the landing gear break, and have u slide it on the belly if need be kinda situations.

"crash effects - crashes cause engines to catch fire or a wing to snap off ect"With due respect, it seems that kids want a game arcade experience, and don't really care about flying. The very last thing in the world I want to do is crash. The thought of it makes me sick. I just flew A2A's magnificent and complex Boeing 377 Stratocruiser around the world without a single mishap. My grandson did like to crash into buildings when he was 5 though. :(

Try crashing the A2A 377 and see what happens. I have the Shockwave (what A2A used to be called) Wings Of Power WWII bombers and these aircraft model crashes. You can even do a belly landing where you skid down the runway with sparks and smoke flying everywhere and the props bent back as they scrape along the ground. Most spectacular (even if it is childish) and more realistic than the sim pausing with CRASH displayed in red on the screen. I would be interested to see if they did a similar thing with 377.