What do we want for fs2006???????

[jeremyclarkson575]

Hi I would want to hear some suggestions for the new fs2006 i have heard about people that say that they want the future of declaring emergencys in the 2006, I want to her what you spect from the fs2006 probably we could send a letter only of suggestions of what people like us want.

thank you for your help to make every year a better flight simulator

[Sobby]

yeah emergencys

[alrot]

hi and welcome to siv.More new aircraft and nothing more from the early of the aviation one them for ex:the right brothers,plane to mention one of them,and the dinamics of flight

[Mr.Ray_Ban]

A more realistic ATC: there

[Chris_F]

How 'bout realistic reliability.  In addition to the current setup for failures make the reliability of the plane dependant on operating conditions.  Run a Cessna engine inverted and it goes boom as all the oil floods in to the wrong places.  Run an engine too hot for too long and it should similarly fail.

Realistic emergencies could also be good.  Cabing depressurization and the cockpit filling with smoke would make life interesting.  I don't think it should get gruesome (no terrorist hijackings or passenger fatalities) but some extreme flying challenges would be fun.

And maybe they could bring back the "game" modes.  Anyone remember the cheezy dog fight and crop dusing modes from 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0?  Maybe dog fighting shouldn't re-appear, but I'd like to see crop dusing and maybe a forest fire fighting mode.  A Search and Rescue mode could be cool too.  But maybe these last points make the sim too much a game.

Improvements to the flight model, ATC, weather, and graphics are always expected...

[JBaymore]

How about just getting all the existing features ... like the weather and all that scenery eye candy.... to run at an acceptable frame rate (like 25fps) on short final into a large airport with 100% AI traffic .........on anything less than the most cutting edge machine available.

Unless you have a 3+ gig CPU at least an 800 fsb with a gig of fast RAM and a totally top end video card..... you already likely cannot run the sim with everything maxed.

If you do try ..... on takeoff and landing...... you probably go into the teens or even single digits.

Just about everyone seems to have the settings turned down in some fashion or have added lower demand textures or something like that.

The last thing I think we need is for Microsoft to try to jam any more big new demanding features in there.  Add minor stuff....sure.  But no "big things".

"Big Things" usually come with processing and performance hits.

In fact..... in my boat they can skip fs2006....... just issue a good PATCH for fs2004.


best,

...................john

[Tequila Sunrise]

built in carrier ops ala CFS2 would be cool for all the military nuts  8)
The idea about reliability and emergencys sounds prettty good too  8)

[Scottler]

In flight emergencies, relatively realistic crash damage (e.g. hard landings damage gear, etc.),  aircraft aging and the ability to run a VA from witin the sim.

[OTTOL]

How about just getting all the existing features ... like the weather and all that scenery eye candy.... to run at an acceptable frame rate (like 25fps) on short final into a large airport with 100% AI traffic .........on anything less than the most cutting edge machine available.

This subject has come up before many times and this thread will surely be a flaming file in no time.
And every time, I hear everyone complain about "not enough realism in this or that!" but the above quote makes the most sense to me.
I really don't care if "when you go to external view  you can't see passengers in the windows of the 777!" or "I can't believe  they didn't model every building and car in the entire city of Chicago into the standard scenery!" or "when you go to cockpit view in the 737, you can't see lint on the seat belts!........I've been in the cockpit of a 737 and let me tell you, it had lint on the seatbelts!!!"..................................I just want a nice looking, smooth flying airplane and cockpit perspective. That's why they call it a flight simulator.

Oh yeah...............the standard ATC programming DOES need some serious overhaul!!!!

[wizbang]

Hi everyone,
I'm a newbie to FS9 (got it a couple of weeks ago)

I had been playing with Austin Meyers X-Plane by Laminar Research.

Both products have their strong points and weak points.

If Flt Sim 2006 could incorporate the following it would really be a huge improvement

1)get rid of the tired old bitmaps that are blurry and lacking in really good detail.
X-Plane:You can now resize the INSTRUMENT FONT layers for the instrument panel to any size you like,
with no restrictions. If you want fonts that are 50 pixels tall that is fine... just resize the PNG files to give any size
font, and X-Plane will figure out how big the fonts should be based on the size of the layer-3 or layer-4 PNG file.

2) More precise control of settings. Click on an auto pilot altim gauge in X-plane it immediatly gets up to its increment speed and stops immediately when you stop pressing the mouse button. Going from say 1800 to 23454 is effortless. In FS9 it's painful to set the altimeter. I'm seem to go past the target height in both directions several times untill i get it right. There seems to be a lag .. it goes real slow then it  picks up speed without any warning and before you know it you have passed where you wanted to go.
in X-Plane all of the gauges are extreemly precise and easy to set.

3) I'd like to see better autopilot stuff (new in Xplane :Better autopilot on the glideslope, including auto-land.)
if FS9 already has auto-land my apologies I just have not found it  yet

4) The ability for ATC to give instructions for a Radar Controlled approach (non ILS) where they essentially talk the pilot entering the airspace onto the runway.

5) In addition to the GPS ( a great FS9 gadget not found in  X-Plane) is to get the Nav Computer the little gadget with all of the key pad button (that is found in X-Plane) This is not really a big item for me cause I find the GPS a facinating feature that's really great.

5) find a way to improve the frame rate.

That's abou it.
If you want seriously accurate physics, an FAA certified simulator http://www.x-plane.com/FTD.html, fast frame rates to practice your tricky manuvers, the ability to create your own custom instrument panels, custom planes and terrain then X-Pane is  your ticket.

BUT
If you want the entire ATP experience and you want virtual cocpits, really stunning more realistic night and day visuals,  a realistic ATC, a very cool GPS feature, full fleged gate to gate realism with taxi ways, terminals, intelligent radio chatter, easy to use database for finding airports, better sound, huge amounts of scenery, flight planners, a much better and easier to use map, etc. Then FS9 is your ticket.

I appreciate X-Plane for what it does, but the overall experience, I have to admit, even with the lower frame rates and the horrendous knob settings that react as though you had a pair of oven mits on, goes to FS9.

I'm still impressed with the night visuals in FS9.
X-plane may have moving cars on the highway but take of from KLAX to PHNL and within three to five miles the coastline behind you in X-Plane becomes completely dark. I even wrote to Austin saying that was kind of bogus (that was three versions ago - still no change) In FS9 you can still see a glimmer of the west coast 45 miles away. Now that's what I remember seeing (at least something similar) when I was on a flight to Hawaii several years ago)

Lastly I want to say thanks to all of the people, most who will never see this message, thanks for all fo the hard work and dedication to the community.

Happy flying

wizbang

[JRoc]

Mm.  Improving existing features is what will happen for the most part.  They might add one or two new things, but in all reality, things like ATC and weather (for example,  realistic thermals, proper icing etc).

[Mozz]

I agree with improving the current features. They're all there really, they can add one or too things like emergency landings etc. But improving the game and performance on the PC's that aren't top end while keeping the graphics to a good standard is a good idea and issuing it in a pay for patch (I guess they could sell it so you choose whether to patch up your version or completely install it new from the CD on your PC). I guess I see this as a good idea partly because I've got some payware and upgrading or re-installing payware can be tedious and difficult (depending on compatibility), I'd rather spend my time flying.

[stevewilson]

After reading this thread, I must agree with improving some of the features such as ATC and so forth.

The only additional realisim I would like to see is what happens today when an airliner is off course and doesn't respond to ATC, and that is the Air Defense Command scrambles.

[Billerator]

Get rid of the 5 year old physics engine, because the visuals are good enough already  >:( .

[SaVas]

Unless you have a 3+ gig CPU at least an 800 fsb with a gig of fast RAM and a totally top end video card..... you already likely cannot run the sim with everything maxed.

I run with everything maxed

As for what I would like to see...more realistic weather from real time weather (basically the only way I fly)

If its raining, then reflective water textures on the ground, and water splash. Emergencies and failures that are 1. not imaginary, and 2 not user set failures. I want failures that I won't know are coming.
And I want to see PASSENGERS in cabins including in the virtual cabin similar to Eaglesoft's Cessna Citation X where you have a businesswoman moving around