Sign in to follow this  
Guest bwilson

Aircraft Wish List

Recommended Posts

Hello, all:For Fly!II this is my list of "dream" aircraft.1. Piper PA-38 Tomahawk.2. Cessna 172 Carburated.3. Cessna 182RG Retractable landing gear.4. Cessna 208 Caravan.Currently "Captain J." is working on the Caravan. blake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

Interesting topic. My list would be something like this, heavy on light jets and twin turboprops:- Lear 60- Beech Starship- Cessna Citation X- Piper Seneca V- Lake RenegadeAll with the Fly level of systems simulation quality of course :)Wish I had time and skills to help make these...John/madmax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>All with the Fly level of systems simulation quality of >course :) >Realistically, the level of FLY system sophistication is now "aging". Third party payware releases such as the "Flight1 Piper Meridian" have taken simulated aircraft system's to a much higher level. A lot of work and time would have to be invested, to develope any new FLYII or possibly future FLYIII aircraft system equipment that exceeds what's now available on the aftermarket, let alone the future.L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,Did anybody attack MSFS in any way? Did anybody even compare Fly!II with MSFS in any way? Then why did you post this message? What did you plan to accomplish with it?Do you have ANY idea about what you're talking about?AGING? Give me a break! Have you EVER taken a look at what CAN be done just with the existing Fly!II aircraft files? I'm not even talking about the SDK and external .DLL files. Have you ever attempted to model systems for Fly!II? What about for MSFS?If the answer to any of the last two questions is NO, then how can you venture to make such a seemingly informed statement?You know, I try to understand where you're coming from and what is your ultimate objective when you post here. Please help me, because I can't figure it out...Respectfully,Alejandro AmigorenaCheshire, CTFly! II Beta Team MemberAthlon XP 1800ABIT KR7A-RAID768Mb RAMMSI GeForce4 Ti4600 8xAGP 128MBSB Audigy GamerCH Flight Yoke USBCH Pro Pedals USB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>AGING? Give me a break! Have you EVER taken a look at what >CAN be done just with the existing Fly!II aircraft files?Then do it, I'm not stopping you....If someone or group models an aircraft for the FLY series with a comprehensive system setup such as that contained in Meridian, then great........... I'll buy!!! But as they say, this is where the "bar" has been raised to. You can no longer say that FLY leads in system's (which it once did).................until you or someone else initiates some "very" advanced design work.And, as to why I post here, why not? Same reason I posted the ROTW Mustang cockpit pics & FLYII So-Cal scenery in the Microsoft Combat forum. The Mustang & scenery just looked far better than what was available in Microsoft's CFS3! Perhaps it's lucky for you & the rest of the FLY community, that I'm not afraid of "cross posting" because it DOES generate interest to other simmers who might have never heard or cared for other simulations.As to myself, I have other projects to worry about & finish, before any attempt in the world of virtual programming. Once they're completed, then who knows. At least I actually DO know quite a bit about real world aircraft systems. Maybe that's why I say the things I do.....?Regards also,L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry, you are just looking for a reaction from people in the forums.In general, Fly! panels and systems along with the fight dynamics are ahead of MSFS...and I do own the SF260(over-rated), but still would rather practice x-wind landings with FLY! or FU3.Yes, there are a few aircraft available for MSFS that might be ahead of a FLY! offering, but those are few and far between.Tony in Miami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,I cannot compare with commercial planes for FS2K2, since I don't have any :). But I've download a considerable number of freeware ones from the file library, and, to avoid sim-wars, let's just say that I very much disagree that they compare to the Fly planes. But to each his own...John/madmax

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry,Couple of things:"At least I actually DO know quite a bit about real world aircraft systems."So do I, but how does the fact that you may know about real world aircraft systems have anything to do with judging whether or not it could be reproduced in Fly!II or MSFS? Moreover, how do you know that it can be done in MSFS and not on Fly!II or Fly!III or Fly!n ?You said:"A lot of work and time would have to be invested, to develope any new FLYII or possibly future FLYIII aircraft system equipment that exceeds what's now available on the aftermarket, let alone the future."If you've never attempted to model this in a simulator how can you possibly make this statement? How do you know this? What if I told you that it COULD be EASILY modeled, how could you challenge MY statement? You simply can't, because you haven't got the slightest idea of what it takes to model systems in a simulator.I really don't mind fact-based statements or criticizm but it's quite irresponsible to just post a statement like yours. You've been around for a quite a while, and although I don't share your point of view, until know I've always thought you knew about what you were talking about.You could have easily posted:My aircraft wish is systems in Fly!II like those in the MSFS Meridian.Think about it, wouldn't that have been more constructive?Take care,Alejandro AmigorenaCheshire, CTFly! II Beta Team MemberAthlon XP 1800ABIT KR7A-RAID768Mb RAMMSI GeForce4 Ti4600 8xAGP 128MBSB Audigy GamerCH Flight Yoke USBCH Pro Pedals USB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alejandro,Rich has been always patient in dealing with Larry, I hope we will carry on the same spirit to FLY detractors or those who tried to belittle the sim. I know sometimes people are not careful with their choice of words and be it as it may they can still voice out their thoughts and perhaps let's take it as a challenge and proved them wrong. FLY2 is almost 2 yrs old (its default aircraft system which is sofar superior IMHO to other sim's default aircraft system )and to compare it to a newly released payware, I believe is something off the hook.chris rpll

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Larry, you are just looking for a reaction from people in >the forums. Yep.........Never denied it........ :)Even told that to "Lindy" when she once visited.. for a Pro-Pilot party.I said something to the effect, that the best part of a "new" sim was something to argue about!>In general, Fly! panels and systems along with the fight >dynamics are ahead of MSFS...Yes they were------ once.>and I do own the >SF260(over-rated), but still would rather practice x-wind >landings with FLY! or FU3. >Hope you have rudder pedals..... :)With sincerity as usual,L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Hope you have rudder pedals..... :) Yes I do, the only to fly...ch pedals gameport version with gutted usb joystick for toe-brakes, works wonderfully.BTW, how's your aircraft coming along, when's the maiden flight?Tony in Miami

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again!Larry waited for awhile before coming back to attack us in this forum.Wonder when Michael will show up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>Larry, >>I cannot compare with commercial planes for FS2K2, since I >don't have any :). But I've download a considerable number >of freeware ones from the file library, and, to avoid >sim-wars, let's just say that I very much disagree that they >compare to the Fly planes. But to each his own... >I seldom use "freeware" planes. While there are a few nice ones around, I prefer payware..........that usually involves a group of programmers, because today's simulated aircraft seem to require thousands of hours to program. It's just gotten far too sophisticated! L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>BTW, how's your aircraft coming along, when's the maiden >flight? >>Tony in Miami I need some more big buck$.........For the transponder, prop governor, vacuum pump, and a few other parts. Panel, radio, & "systems" wiring is nearly all complete. L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry:I can't tell you much about the subject because I simply don't have the Piper Meridian for MSFS, I use my money on other things while downloading great freeware for FLY II. It caught my attention that you had to pay to get something better than FLY II.. a 2 Year old program.When you have to wait 2 years to get something better than FLY (Systems wise ) then that only tells you how advance and sophisticated FLY! is. To say that FLY Systems is aging is to affirm that FLY has been explored / exploded at its 100%. My take is that we are only using 50% of what FLY could give us, therefore no payware is close to what FLY can really give you.Of course you could be right and the FLY Systems could be aging, that's why there is a plan for FLY III.;)And even if FLY III gets to the shelves some day ( not 2003 for sure ) you could still prefer MSFS payware, you can do whatever you want with your money and think / say whatever you want about FLY, I will still respect you and consider you part of the community as you will always be.I just pray to GOD and Rich to give me the same patience I had today after I saw your post. :-lol Kind Regards.Javier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Alejandro,I know what you are feeling about Larry now. ;-)I wrote many posts in the past about Larry's point of view in this forum and unfortunately his never changed. If you post anything about Fly! better than MSFS, Larry receives a sound alarm from Micro$oft to post a response almost in the light speed. :-)Don't ask me why he is in this forum because I will never know. Compare ROTW's Mustang from Fly! II with MS Combat Simulator (a game) is the best that Larry can do with Fly!.So I give up.Take care,Keyton Cabral

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anything from Airbus, but with reasonably accurate (looking) cockpit.-DK----David KohlFly! II v2.5.240Dell 8200 P4/1.8G, 1024MB RAM, Nvidia GF4 Ti4600 v41.09, WinXP Home Edition SP1.CH Pro Pedals and Yoke USB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,my secret dreams : some light jet trainer eg. BAe Hawk, AlphaJet or Aero L-159, and some russian cargo planes : Il-76, An-12 etc.Hope they will be available someday...OndraLKTB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aging...every thing is aging!Why I like Fly!:1. I'm in flight school right now, and I like the fact that I can use Terrascene to model an area, fly there, and then plan an actual cross country and see the same terrain when I do. 2. All aircraft look realistic. 3. They fly pretty OK too! :)4. The downloads for fly don't dissapoint.My personal Flight Simulator heirachy:1. Fly!II2. Fly!2k 3. X-plane (does wind very well... great for practicing landings.)4. MSFS2002 (spent $25.00 learned my lesson from FS2000 ...no more.)5. MSFS2000 (spent nearly $200.00 in addons...still dissapointed.) 6. I have Flight Unlimited but it's "Limited" to me because it doesn't want to work on my computer.Any one out there want to post their Dream Aircraft???blake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CoolI used to travel 3 or 4 times a week in the central USA for my job. Whenever I flew an Airbus it was a blast. blake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

>In general, Fly! panels and systems along with the fight >dynamics are ahead of MSFS...and I do own the >SF260(over-rated), but still would rather practice x-wind >landings with FLY! or FU3. >Okay................ for the sake of "friendly" discussion & some topics around here,Why??? to the above statementIn my own history of flight simulation, the original FLY flight models didn't appeal to me at all. Once Rob Young created the V88's, the FLY models along with the default panels & added Terrascene became more appealing than FS2K. But although the V88's seemed to be a smoother flight platform for instrument flight, than FS2K, the FS2K navigation data-base worked better VOR wise, in my flight area. Because of that, it was about 50/50 between the two sims.IMO--- as to the FLYII models, some worked & some didn't. I already know the why's & wherefor's of why the models arn't equal, so I won't get into that. But.................. getting to the RealAir Simulations SF260. I think it's the best "single engine" aircraft ever created for ANY desktop simulation, flight dynamic wise. It's the most authentic plane I've run into for using cross-controls on slip manuvers. The "feel" & range of controls is near perfect. The virtual cockpit also add's a lot to peripheral vision which add's an increased sense of flight.For other manuvers such as tailslides, snap rolls, and hammerheads, it's also the best plane around to date, even though it's not really a pure aerobatic aircraft. The break from stall & into a spin is also much faster than the RealAir Citabria/Decathalon for FLYII. The FLY models were a bit on the slow side in reaction, IMO.As you can see, I don't believe it's over-rated at all. It's designed by Rob Young who put many hours into it, not to mention all that time previously getting FLY models up to speck. I even noticed that another well respected flight model designer for MSFS mentioned that the flight charcteristics were very good and it's on his HD also. At first, he didn't think Rob had enough experience with MS products, but that quickly changed. For the record, I do have actual flight experience in a Marchetti 260, as well as aerobatics in a Pitt's about 10 years ago. This does aleast give me something to compare with. As to all the comments on this thread, they don't really bother me, because I've been around too long & getting too old :) In fact, I read this forum every day. If one was to actually read my comments regarding FLY in other forums, they would notice that all comments are very favorable, and have actually generated some interest in the FLY simulations. I've often went to the trouble of producing some good looking screenshot presentations to go with what I've wrote. Now I'll admit, that my comments wern't always on the "nice" side, but that was at least three years ago.. Maybe ............very few around here, read the "other" forums! :)L.Adamson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larry, you're always welcomed on this forum. The fact is that we are a minority of simmers who probably have both sims, yet we gravitate toward FLY2 for a variety of reasons--all of which subjective. Frankly, I miss the days when flight sims were being announced with a frequency that made waiting for one far more exciting than actually flying it afterwards. tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this