Why I love this sim.......

[LAdamson 240]

>>At this point I only miss one item from the FLY world ->>aircraft's ground simulation. >>Michael,>You are right. For me this is most obvious at the moment the>A/C breaks contact with the ground during takeoff. There is>the perceived sense of a loss of resistance or friction. I'm>not sure how to describe it, but it is there. I miss the SoCal type of scenery that's in my screenshot. I know it's of limited source, requires a higher altitude to become sharp, and takes a whopping amount of hard drive space! But NO other sim looks as good from altitude. When I peer down through the new FS2004 clouds, I'd rather be peering at that SoCal type landmass! And while we're on the subject of likes; I also miss the sharpness & 3D look of many FLY panels. Some VC's of MSFS are great, but seldom do cockpit's approach the clarity of the originals for FLY...........including the Flight1 Merdian.... Michael :) MSFS exteriors can look super sharp & a just waxed finished, but the panels lack sharpness in graphics, especially along edges.Actually I don't really miss it, because it's still on the HD and will remain so. edit.......... now I'm fighting with myself. Just fired up the Merdian. One thing about it, it's instrument graphics are "super sharp"! Just throw them on a FLY 3D look---- 2D panel, then..http://forums.avsim.com/user_files/24482.jpgL.Adamson

[michal 44]

>Just fired up the>Merdian. One thing about it, it's instrument graphics are>"super sharp"!Larry,They are indeed super sharp. I would have to say they are even sharper than FLY's. But I generally agree about the sharpness of FLY's cockpits. It was (and still is) an excellent technology. What I still prefer in Meridian however are the photo-real panel textures (those tiny grey 'bumps') - it would be next to impossible to recreate it in FLY.But you got the Merdian in FS and then there is a big void - few developers are willing to expand this amount of time on a single project.Michael J.

[Chris Willis 8]

Hi, "Even the latest sim can't match FLY's volumetric clouds it's just like the real clouds, that's why I like to FLY the Stearman and just feel the whisp of the clouds"I have beta test fs2004, and x-plane, fly 1/ 2, fs2000, fs2002, FUIII, can't approach the weather/environment engine capability in fs2004.There is too many really important things not available on those previous sim which are finally available in fs2004, such as many many clouds type, all cumulus type, almost all cb type, all stratus type, thunderstorm clouds type, full 3d cumulus/stratus clouds overcast.Unlimited clouds layers that's remain in 3d shape, there is no disappearing clouds when you get close to the clouds or lower like fly and msfs, the turbulance finally surpasse FUIII which was the best until now, dynamic engine clouds that's form/dissipate according to the condition/temps in realsitic way, realistic gradual transition clouds, far clouds etc. Fully customizible environment sky system with full realistic haze, lightning implementation and sky color, not available in flyII.Consider it is only the default fs2004 which will be improved much more on 3rd party.-All clouds types that form and dissipate according to the condition -Unlimited 3d clouds Layer in the sky, not limited to 3 clouds layers, clouds do not appears flat from high level clouds, like fs2k2, only the cirrus clouds which is the correct way to do it.-All Clouds type available that's form according to the condition-Clouds type selected dynamically by the simulator as you fly through changing weather conditions. The temp / dew point will influence how likely it is for clouds to form, and what type of clouds will form like the real thing.-Dynamic weather engine with rate level or to OFF, for any weather theme, real weather and real weather updated each 15 minutes-Weather Map and Station, Weather themes-Far clouds and non disappearing clouds like fs2k, 2k2-Clouds Front-The sky colors, rain and lightning effects, and cloud density vary with altitude, air density, temperature and dew point. Transparency changes as you fly through clouds, -Cloud colors change with time-of-day , and in each dates 140 variation of sky color.ThanksChris Willis[link:fsw.simflight.com/FSWMenuFsSim.html]Clouds And Addons For MsFs

[LAdamson 240]

There is just a bunch of us "lurkers" that still hang around.......... isn't there? :)L.Adamson

[Avcomware 1]

Hi, Chris.I was going to wait to get the game, but since you guys are around and seem to have some time, I

[michal 44]

> Do you think that some of the WX effects are like FLYII ?I am not Chris but can answer this one - NO, it's a new generation of WX effects.>the Coast lines that is somewhat realistic?I find coastlines quite realistic (in FS2002) but maybe it is not realistic enough for some.Michael J.

[LAdamson 240]

Same old TV. The AI is adjustable in FS2004 too!L.AdamsonP.S.---- have you built the perfect sim yet?

[LAdamson 240]

Michael, Some coast lines......http://forums.avsim.com/user_files/24638.jpghttp://forums.avsim.com/user_files/24639.jpg

[Krister 51]

Regarding the coastline I can only speak for the island where I live in Finland and that is surrounded by some 6000 smaller islands. FS2004 is better than FS2002 that really was a joke. But still FS2004 is far far inferior to what I found in Fly!II with the global update patch. I'm really not saying that FS2004 is bad but that Fly!II is stunningly realistic when it comes to my island(s).I also maintain that the ground in Fly!II is much better looking from 10,000 feet and above than in FS2004. The repetiviness of the ground textures in FS2002 are still there, at least in the areas that I've seen. Perhaps I should have a look at my hardware settings, but I do have all slides maxed out.Then again there are many areas that are much better in FS than in Fly!II. But it's nice to know that Fly!II can still stand its ground!/Krister

[michal 44]

Personally I look at the coastlines as another attribute of ground scenery, same as color, resolution, etc. And despite big advances in the scenery in the last few years unfortunately it still doesn't look (for me) anywhere near like the real scenery - neither in FS nor in FLY. Until the scenery starts looking much, much better (and this date is nowhere on the horizon) I can certainly live with minor coastline errors. I can get myself excited about the weather or the sky but it is very difficult for me to get excited about the ground scenery these days. :(Michael J.

[Guest Colins2]

MichaelYour views are pretty well known as are your preferences for accurate IFR etc.However, there are a lot of us here who enjoy more the VFR aspects of flying/simming or both.For us, the ground scenery is very important and the more we can do to make it more realistic, the better.This, of course, applies to any sim, whatever the user's preference may be.Colin

[Avcomware 1]

Hi, Michael.I

[LAdamson 240]

> to tell that I am>in not in any way biased or condescending, and have only one>goal in mind, the best and most useful tool we can possibly>achieve, regardless of who makes it.You purposely drew me into this................. so I'd quit while you're ahead. The archives are full of your "biased" thoughts. And yes, I deleted my first response "draft", as it would have met with instant thread lock..L.Adamson

[Avcomware 1]

Hi, Mr. L. SAdamson..Unless you have something constructive to say, I

[michal 44]

>but I can honestly say that at this time, FLY is>still the best, and with the most potential tool, available to>pilots.Hey, you are entitled to whatever opinion, however 'biased'. But honestly your view is shared by tiny minority of simming populace. Michael J.