What aircraft would we like to see in FSX?

[Gidsey]

personally. i don't want to see many older aircraft in. because i have the patience span of a flea and can never fly them much further than the end of the runway. i love my military aircraft however and would like to see some of them in there this time.
my personal opinion is that these aircraft must be included in the line up...

1. Eurofighter Typhoon.

2. Supermarine Spitfire.

3. Joint Strike Fighter (F35)

[msh100]

well an aircraft is a start

[Katahu]

personally. i don't want to see many older aircraft in. because i have the patience span of a flea and can never fly them much further than the end of the runway. i love my military aircraft however and would like to see some of them in there this time.
my personal opinion is that these aircraft must be included in the line up...

1. Eurofighter Typhoon.

2. Supermarine Spitfire.

3. Joint Strike Fighter (F35)

One thing you gotta remember is that M$ can only put so much aircraft for a FS package. Therefore, it is virtually impossible for M$ to meet the demands of EVERY user in FS community. Besides, judging from their screenshots, it appears that much of the space in the DVD will be devoted to highly-detailed and complex scenery files.

And don't forget, you will always find a Eurofighter, a Spit, and a JSF [made for FS] available to download for free at sites like SimV. So, don't worry about the aircraft, just worry about how to upgrade your hardware for the new scenery and effects.

[wealthysoup]

2. Supermarine Spitfire.

Why bother, just get the real air spitfire

[TheBod1357]

Personally, I think it would be awesome to have a complete family of Boeings, 707-(is there a 787?)777, but mostly, a 767 would be great, as well as maybe an Airbus A380 for the largest heavy to grace the default FS planes?

[Dianna78sg]

more than having more aircraft...I would love to see a detail model complete with virtual cabin and more detail virtual cockpit (so we rely no more on panel)

[legoalex2000]

more than having more aircraft...I would love to see a detail model complete with virtual cabin and more detail virtual cockpit (so we rely no more on panel)

or totally ditch the 2D cockpit altogether... idk, espically for the not so special computers... ok well, mabye make it an option to rid of 2D...

ramos

[Katahu]

more than having more aircraft...I would love to see a detail model complete with virtual cabin and more detail virtual cockpit (so we rely no more on panel)

Bad idea.

Why?

Simple.

FS is sometimes used by student pilots who are trying to understand how to use the instruments on the panel. For example, I would like to see how the VOR gauge works so that I can navigate when flying in real life.

Besides, even with the active gauges in the highly-detailed DVC, it will be hard on the eyes to even read the gauges. Think of the resolution of one's monitor and imagine how pixelated the gauge would be if read from a distance in FS. Even zooming in can be a waste of time since pilots have to quickly look at the guages and make critical adjustments.

[Dianna78sg]

no it's not

why ?

simple

because detailing the (Virtual Cockpit) VC would make those student know much well where all specific button are located, where this function is limited on panel, and it's more challenging.

and there is no problem simulationg how VOR gauge work on VC...even PSS add-on have a much reliable VC than panel

[Tweek]

I don't think anyone relies on the panel. If you prefer to use the panel, you have the option to, if you prefer the VC (like me), then use the VC.

I really don't see the logic in "do away with..." and "get rid of..." posts. Why remove something from the sim if it's doing no harm by being there? The sim is catered to fit everyones needs, not a model built around you. Which is why I think the default aircraft should be a little more varied, to appeal to everyone, maybe bring a warbird or two back.

[Katahu]

no it's not

why ?

simple

because detailing the (Virtual Cockpit) VC would make those student know much well where all specific button are located, where this function is limited on panel, and it's more challenging.

and there is no problem simulationg how VOR gauge work on VC...even PSS add-on have a much reliable VC than panel

Uhh... not every button in a DVC is in their exact location in the panel as a real-life button is. M$ might get the location wrong. That's why you have addon developers all over the place, developers with more resources than M$, America, China, and the EU combined.

[Mike..]

I'm no pilot nor do I claim to be. I don't know what actually goes where on every flight station. But I thought after 911 M$ pulled there flightsims from the shelf to 1.Remove the towers so idiots can't recreate the tragedy in thier own homes for kicks. And 2 to relocate not all but some of the gauges in their flight stations so that in the event terrorists try to use FS as a training aide they wouldn't be able to duplicate their foolish attempt in a real AC (as a real AC they would be correct). Now I don't know if it still rings true today, but I thought M$ still did small relocations of said guages. I'm probly rambling off topic here.

I would like to see M$ go in a whole new direction with their choice of AC. Though there are a few new ones fourthcomming in this edition, they're bringing back alot of the same ole same ole.............now with textured rivits IMHO a facelift of this magnatude should be a complete package. To me it looks as though M$ piggy backed off the Falcon 4.0 boys and not so muched changed the sim but beefed up the graphics capabilities and threw in some highway traffic and some animals. Kind of like FS9 with a few payware addons. It doen't matter what AC to me just as long as all of them are different from FS9. Worse case, i'll do like I have with FS9. Buy the sim and sit back and wait for the freeware to fly My 2 cents........

[Dr.Goodfly]

You guys never fly Default a/c??? That's almost ALL that I fly!!!!! WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE( or Jet Fuel, your choice)!!!!!!! I THINK IM GONNA BE SICK!!!!!

[Katahu]

I'm no pilot nor do I claim to be. I don't know what actually goes where on every flight station. But I thought after 911 M$ pulled there flightsims from the shelf to 1.Remove the towers so idiots can't recreate the tragedy in thier own homes for kicks. And 2 to relocate not all but some of the gauges in their flight stations so that in the event terrorists try to use FS as a training aide they wouldn't be able to duplicate their foolish attempt in a real AC (as a real AC they would be correct).

Well with today's addon developers who would always provide the most accurate aircraft and scenery for FS, it would be pointless for M$ to relocate monuments and rearrange the gauges as most of us here almost always fly addon jetliners and fighter planes with accurate panels based on photos while flying over addon sceneries that are as accurate as Ozzy's marksmanship with his spit.

Like I said before:

Addon developers have more resources than M$, America, China, and the EU combined. Oh yes, and Al-qida too.

[TheBod1357]

If what he is saying about guage rearrangement and such is true, I think Microsoft is being a slight bit egotistical about how terrorists can access information.

Such as if a terrorist actually is using FS9 to find out how to destroy something, and low and behold, it has been removed from the simulator, the terrorist will obviously assume that the landmark does not exist.

HELLO! It is called the internet! Or a map. Or a picture found of a particular airplane.

I dont think that MS needs to take it into thier own hands to stop terrorism, as there are many ways of retrieving information.

And yes, I know that it is very possible that FS9 was instrumental in the events of 9-11, but what needs to be realized is that even without FS9, the hijackers probably would find another way.

Yes I am blunt, but even though it was a terrible tragedy, does anyone actually feel safer knowing that the guages in FS are 3 inches from where they are in real planes?