A Challenge To The Fly! II Community

[Roger Mazengarb 0]

G'day Larry,Sorry mate, Henri's right and you are wrong, despite you best efforts to inform them of Fly! II's deficiencies , the general public are totally unaware of Fly!'s existance. I teach classes of aircraft apprentices and they have never heard of Fly! but all are aware of MSFS.Cheers,Roger @YSSY

[Roger Mazengarb 0]

G'day Andy,Mate I know you are frustrated over the water issue but the Beta team and Rich are still supporting Fly!II . Sure the pace has dropped off a bit but what's the rush. :-) I'm not sure if the water issue is even on the agenda. For Sydneys sake I also hope that someday this may be addressed BUT if it isn't then no big deal; there is still plenty in FLY! II to keep my interest level going.Good to here from you again. How's Uni going?Cheers,Roger @YSSY

[Guest tonyc]

As you can see, Rich, we miss you.tony

[Guest]

Hi you guys,good topic & full of passion. One thing I must say, I have had Fly 2 for about 10 - 12 months, and have only found out about all the things you can do with it. Do I live a sheltered life? This product is so cool, it has its probs yes, but it will only die if we let it. I tell all my friends about Fly 2 and have converted 2 people to the product who lived and dreamed the other sims, and thought they were the best. When one guy saw how quick I was picking it all up was truly amazed. Im just getting my head around TM 2.2, what fun ;)Here is my first try with EGGP - LiverpoolMay Fly live long and Prosper!

[michal 44]

I fully agree with Larry. Many FLY die-hards (like myself) abandoned the platform and went with the FS. And they certainly tried and tested FLY2 extensively. If FLY can't keep its own troops loyal there is little chance it can gain market share. I believe in market forces and consumers who always find the product if it happens to be a very good one. Word-of-mouth, internet tidbits are powerful marketing tools. If FLY2 got excellent press/reviews from start even your students would have heard about it unless they happen to be a very narrow-minded bunch.Michael J.

[Guest]

Dean,I understand, but I guess what I`m really saying is, like the original Fly! - Fly!2 is not a polished product like MSFS2002.You can`t even make a simple animated model for Fly!2, this should be the very least of "simple" things developers can produce - but they can`t.It was with the combined enthusiasm of Tri and the Fly! community that got us Fly!2k - but in some ways we are back to the original Fly! stage with Fly!2.Andy

[Guest]

G`day Roger,I guess I`m a little frustrated, but I am just being honest.Uni is good, I`m on holiday at the mo - hope all is well with you :) .Nice to see you again.Kind RegardsAndy

[Ben Johnson 3]

Tony / Fly! Forum - I agree Fly! is the best sim on the market! I own just about every other sim out there (PS1, MS2K2, X-Plane, etc.) and always come back to Fly!.Since TRI had to move on for it's own financial survival, it's not surprising RAL or PMMD have or will strictly produce add-ons for FS2K2.My disappointment is with RAL (and possibly PMDG) waiting until now to make this public knowledge. If this has been thier stance, I wish their web site would have been updated. I know PMDG has stated their future efforts for Fly! will be based on the 757 purchases (and I understand this from an economic standpoint). If I'm mistaken, I believe the 757 has surpassed PMDG's expectations (this is based on posts by Rob R when the 757 was initially released). So if PMDG has decided to focus only on FS2K2 they should make a public statement as such (and update their web site).As it stands now I'm (I'm sure others are too) waiting for the TB-9 and Arrow to be completed and released.I would love to help the community/teams with add-ons. My profession is QA/QC. I'm a very basic C programmer. Let me know what I can do (I'll learn, point me in the right direction) and I'll help out. I don't want to see the sim die. I have no problem paying for an on-going maintenance fee.Regards,Bob Lyddy

[Guest tonyc]

As a beta tester for PMDG, it is unfortunate that the release of their 757 was problematic: their server could not handle the downloads, and the release was supposed to be a preliminary one, without much advertisement, until Rich H provided a fix for the gear problem. Heck, after all that work ,these things could have been worked on more carefully. I do say, however, that their total silence in the past month is a great mistery. They 've always taken pride in communicating with their customers, so their lack of partecipation in the forums these days is troubling. Then again, knowing them, they're probably too busy getting FLY rabbits ready to come out of the hat.;-)tony

[Guest Henri W]

Larry,Let me mention some of the items that are quite important to me.Being a hang glider pilot I do care a lot about the sky. Clouds are what matters when you are up there. The clouds of the other and major commercial sim do not give me the feeling of flying through or near them. And believe me, I do have the cloud packs of FSW installed. Unfortunately even FSW cannot take away the shortcomings of the other brand's clouds (no real 3D, but flat).Something I am also missing when I am flying the other sim is the fact that I am stuck with one choice for the 2D panels. You either have a fairly large amount of instruments to look at, but no view of the environment (e.g. runway), or you have a great view and hardly any instrument to look at. The great thing of Fly! (II) is the fact that you can set up your system such that you can change forward views by one key stroke. Of course you will reply that the virtual cockpits are the solution to these problems. In my opinion (and I stress MY) these VC do not even come close to a good 2D panel (many will disagree), because of the poor graphical appearance and the lack of working instruments. I simply like Fly! (II)'s panel concept much more.Something I really like in the competing sim is the out of the box worldwide scenery. I even bought some mesh addons for areas I used to fly over in reality. It was always my dream to do a pre-competition study of the area I was going to visit on my PC. I must say the elevations are stunning now, but my joy is generally spoilt after a couple of minutes of flying due to the fact that the textures of the sim become incredibly blurry.Another annoying issue I have with the other sim is its autopilot. Correct me if I am wrong, but it seems there are a few flaws in this area.I must have been quite lucky with the fact that Fly! II always worked like a charm on my system. On my old P3 800 (o/c to 880 MHz) I typically have frame rates between 15 and 25. Not jerky at all.I do not say that the other sim is a bad product, because it isn't. I like it for the good things it has and I do use it every now and then. Fact remains that overall I like Fly! II more. If others like the other sim more than that is fine to me.I will definitely keep developing things for Fly! II, simply because I like it and because I would like to give something back to the Fly! community. The atmosphere here was always very good and I hope it will stay that way. I would like to finish with thanking Richard Harvey for everything he made possible. The involvement he showed I have never seen from the developers from the major commercial flight sim. Just my two eurocents,Henri

[LAdamson 240]

>Something I am also missing when I am flying the other sim >is the fact that I am stuck with one choice for the 2D >panels. You either have a fairly large amount of instruments >to look at, but no view of the environment (e.g. runway), or >you have a great view and hardly any instrument to look at. >The great thing of Fly! (II) is the fact that you can set up >your system such that you can change forward views by one >key stroke. Of course you will reply that the virtual >cockpits are the solution to these problems. In my opinion >(and I stress MY) these VC do not even come close to a good >2D panel (many will disagree), because of the poor graphical >appearance and the lack of working instruments. I simply >like Fly! (II)'s panel concept much more. >Henri,There are a number of new aircraft for FS2002, that have many options for the 2D panel as well as some terrific looking VC's. The 2D's offer a full view, landing view, as well as the option to click on specific instruments & get a "king size" view. These are actually much easier to view than the smaller sizing in most FLY panels.As to the VC's, you must check out the Dreamfleet Archer II, or Flight 1's Cessna 421. Both of these are very well done & really add to the experience. With Gmax, these VC's are just getting better & better!Archer & Cessna 421. Nearly all instruments & avionics work in the VC mode. Easy drop down windows for adjustments. I like the VC's for the "illusion" of flight that they provide.L.Adamson

[Guest Henri W]

Larry,Thanks for showing these pictures. I have to admit that they really look very good. How about frame rates when using the VC? Cheers,Henri

[Fall_guy 1]

Hi Christian..........how you do'inWhen I posted that Idea, I honestly expected some kind of responce or suggestions, but I think ONE person acknowledged the idea. That left me of the opinion that knowone was prepared to contribute to FLY's survival and therefore I put the Projects on Hold.Thanks anyway for the interest.JohnDC10 projectB737-500

[Guest]

Man, reading all of these posts the last few days has really sparked a fire in me for what I love about this sim. Until I discovered the Fly! forums on Avsim, I had never joined an online community and discovered what it can be like to share a hobby and passion with people all over the world. I've worked on several Fly! II projects and have received help from a number of people on these forums (thanks!). I am a software developer by trade and have an easy time warming up to a product that requires quite a bit of technical knowledge to work with effectively (ini tweaks, calculations, trial and error, etc). My father, most of my uncles and both grandfathers are pilots and are always amazed at what I can do in this simulator. I just wish that I could set them up w/ Fly! II as well, but because they are so inexperienced with computers, I'm often afraid that they'll get stuck in issues/bugs that occasionally arise.I too have started to develop an aircraft for Fly! II -- the Lancair Columbia 300. I have a significant amount of experience in Photoshop and 3D Studio, so it seemed a perfect fit. Boy was I in for a surprise when I realized how many hours I would spend on it! I still haven't finished, but it has been a labor of love. One week while my wife and children were out of town and I was off work, I spent every waking moment on my panel -- probably 50-60 hours! I can definitely understand why some here say it takes a team to produce a great aircraft.One final thought I wanted to share. TRI has provided so much for us as devlopers including the SDK, documentation and support on these forums, that it practically feels like an open source effort (I know some have suggested that Fly! II development take on a more formalized open source arrangement). But whether or not something like that ever happens, I'm just happy to be able to work on Flight Simulator related projects with this kind of supportive community effort. Incidentally there are some interesting open source flight sim projects going on: http://flightgear.sourceforge.net/ is a good example.Thanks for everyone's help and involvement and I'm certainly not giving up my efforts!Dan LarsonSelf Proclaimed Fly!II EvangelistHere is an older screenshot of my panel in progress:http://home.earthlink.net/~finsdad/FlyII/colu00L.jpg

[Guest Henri W]

John,I must have missed your original post. Sounds like a good idea and I am willing to contribute.Best regards,Henri