Gibbage

Im just wondering what about the cockpit was less then appealing? What cockpit? This is a personal question, since I modeled almost all of them myself. I dont want to steer this away from the current topic, so please reply via PM. Just looking for some feedback.

First we need to get the tools in shape, then we can see about new aircraft. I dont have a lot of time, so I would need to make sure that if I were to model an aircraft like the 172, it would be financially viable. It takes months of work to build even a simple aircraft like the 172. Im doing the Seabee for free because its already made its money in FSX =)

Any reward system I would have would be acceptable from the perspective of a proper pilot!!! Nothing like flying inverted under a bridge, or something that would be against FAA rules. For Alaska, I was thinking of having you fly from airport A and land at airport B, but keeping the flight level under X. Forcing you to fly between mountians and into vally's, simulating bush flying. This would unlock the Kenmore air livery or something, since this is what Kenmore Air does! Kenmore is famous in the PNW, and started as a Seabee sales office. People would come into the office, and ask the pilots to be dropped off on a lake, or in the wild. Thats what got them started, so its history, not mockery. THATS what I want in Flight, and I think the mission system is a great tool.

I will ask Stone about cargo, but I see no reason it cant! I loved flying cargo, and laughed my &@($* off when I inverted a cargo load full of chickens.

Im not sure if multi-engine is possible. I do know that the C-46 is in, but it could be a simplified flight model that only acts like a twin engine, and not a real twin. I never downloaded any of those worthless warbirds, so I cant really check how it fly's. Cessna 172 is possible, and I even have access too a Cessna 177. I flew it around Seattle for about 2 hours last week (in real life).

Thanks everyone for buying the Seabee. I put it up for sale on Aerosoft for people who dont like the Flight 1 wrapper. http://www.aerosoft.com/cgi-local/us/iboshop.cgi?showd,6496239010,D12766 I have a question for people who play Flight though. One of the options I have available, is to also have unlockable skins, like they did with the original aircraft. Like fly X miles, and you unlock a skin, or land at Y airport, and unlock another. Do you guys LIKE this feature? What I would like to do is have all the default livery's available, but have "special" livery's unlockable. Like a Hawaii and Alaska themed livery for people who compleated spacific task's, as a reward. I personally liked this feature in Flight as long as it was not abused. When you flew around on servers, you would wear your badge with pride! They wont be hard missions/goals, but something you would need to work at to get. Like flying a long distance over Alaska, or island hopping all islands in Hawaii in 1 flight. Something like that. So what say you?

Its possible, with some sacrifices. Flight was modular, and components were to be installed over time like jet mecanics, and glass displays. Sadly that did not happen, so we will have a limited selection of tools at our disposal. You can have a Cessna 172, but it will need to stick with steam gauges. No G1000 in Flight... Thats why I stated that the aircraft must be simple.

Its not QUITE abandoned. We are working on a way to put 3rd party aircraft into Flight and have had some success.

Let me just say, as one of the former developers on the Flight team, reading stuff like this really makes my day. I truly wanted Flight to introduce simming to a new generation, and im glad it did to some extent. It also holds a very special place in my hart, and the engine truly has massive potential if it could ever truly be tapped.

There really is no money needed. We are both doing this in our free time, and money really wont help things go by faster. If you like the Seabee once its released, feel free to donate money for it though, or buy the FSX version.

I think the haters got tired of hating and went away thinking its a dead sim, and there mission is accomplished. If we can open the sim up to modding, I really think it could revitalize the sim. I never liked the direction MS took with Flight (cockpitless warbirds), but the heard of Flight was a sim much more advanced then FSX in many ways. The team was just never able to tap those advancements!

Then everything is working fine! You were always a bad pilot.

Here are some updated screenshots of the Seabee, with some fixed shaders.

Just wanted to pop in and say YES, stonelance and I ARE working on porting FSX aircraft into Flight. There WILL be limitations due to a large amount of technology changing between FSX and Flight, but simple aircraft should be possible. Stone is doing the vast amount of work on this project, with moral and art support from me. Right now, we are running up against a flight modeling wall and would like to talk to someone who knows FSX's flight model well to help us out on the project. Here are the screenshots. Its still early, but it shows that stone has made some great progress! Here is the BIG news. I will be giving away the Seabee for FREE! I spent a lot of time working on Flight, and sad that it didn't really reach its full potential, and this is my gift to those who still fly. Hopefully we can get more 3rd party work into Flight. Hopefully we can work our way around the current roadblocks, but this is in no way an easy project.

Its nice and refreshing to see so much desire for ACES/FS to come back. If only reality would match our dreams... I would be all for the re-forming of ACES, just as long as its NOT under the Microsoft banner.