FS 2006????? Whats the next step?????

[Boss_BlueAngels]

First and formost fix that blasted flight model! lol  If they wanna know  how to get it really RIGHT, they should look at the dynamics in GreatPlanes RC flight simulator!  It even models the propwash over the airframe!   It would be nice to do some, at least, semi-realistic aerobatics in the game.

Another thing I'd like, as mentioned earlier, would be better ATC system.  It'd be sweet if you could request vectors for the different approaches at airports, or just request the approach via an arc, or procedure turn... something different.

and also improve the GPS.  At least make it so you can program in your own flight plan in the unit itself.  It's much more realistic that way, and can be handy if you need to go to an alternate real quick.  

[beefhole]

has anyone here actually PLAYED this game? some of the recent posts on this board have had me scratching my head. you CAN request a different approach or a different runway for landing. you can even select a different kind of approach. are there any virtual pilots in here? (jk, but seriously you can)

[FS_Pilot]

If you are all serious about getting microsoft to make improvements in the new version of FS2006 then send your ideas to microsoft's flight simulator division. the email address is Tell_FS@microsoft.com

[Boss_BlueAngels]

Yes, I play the game all the time.  I tried doing a VOR approach into my local airport via the 7DME arc and the "atc" continues to have me flying around in a wild goose chase.  I tried doing an ILS via vectors the other day at anoter nearby airport and they had me do two circles over the blasted thing.  I don't remember ever having to do that when I flew the real approachs for the last 9 months. lol

[MattNW]

[quote]Yes, I play the game all the time.

[14bis]

i ha active camera on fs2002...got the free version for fs9...never got it to work...if anyone couls explain how to make it work..i would aprecciate...thank you

[flyflyflyaway]

I also think they need to improve emergencies. right now if your engine fails there is no way to notify the ATC, and he could have you circling the airport for five minutes, when in reality you only have two to spare!

I will again use that example except this time there is no airport nearby, uh oh you say, so you tune your transponder to 122.5 and squawk 7700, except nothing happens!!!

[FS_Pilot]

For me, being a helicopter enthusiast i would like to see Cyclic Force Feedback for that realistic feel

[congo]

I honestly don't see a point in quibbling about scenery or aircraft wishes when these things can be so easily downloaded.

Flight Simulator has two MAJOR barriers to being as real as it gets.

1. Flight Dynamics - for instance, there is not a single plane that realistically simulates stall/spin characteristics in ANY MS flight simulator. This has to be a limitation of the Sims, as I simply don't believe that no-one out there has actually spun a plane before and therefore doesn't know what it's like. It's a reflection of an inadequate set of parameters available for us to work with.

2. Atmospheric Dynamics - in short, this is 2 dimensional at present, I'm sorry, but that just doesn't cut it. As sure as an aircraft climbs and descends, so does the atmosphere itself.

[afi0yz]

I agree, the physics should be looked at , and the realism of most of the planes suck , althought I still enjoy fs as a game

[SnowPipe]

Hi guys! Im new here.

To start off, I love this sim.

[jordonj]

I actually LIKE the panel, the thing I'd like to see is

More scenery more scenery and more scenery.   Little things like state capitols, the Mackinac Bridge, or the Mormon church in Salt Lake City (I don't think its there is it?)

I understand that modeling ALL this may not be possible, but it would be really cool if it could be done...

[jordonj]

While we're talking all this realism here, let's not forget the main goal...to have fun!!!

Some people don't like hardcore realism...

[Billerator]

Yeah, but when the slogan is 'as real as it gets' you kind of expect realism.

My two most important wants are:

1. More accurate aerodynamics.
   The physics engine needs tweaking. I think they should approach aircraft design the same way that Laminar Research ( X plane ) chose to. Why cant they make a system whereby the parameters are calculated from a model ( created in gmax lets say ) instead from the current system where everything has to be input using tables.
The problem that designers have with table input, is the fact that these parameters dont just grow on trees. Now if some of these are wrong, the plane does not fly true to life. Most of these could be calculated from a model.
In my eyes the designer should create one model for visuals and another for aerodynamics, simple.

2. Weather hasnt improved a lot ( Im not talking about the visuals ) like Congo said, I think it too should be calculated according to the surroundings. I for one would love to fly into some windshear on the odd landing. Thermals would no longer need to be part of the scenery.


Overall I think the visuals have been developed enough in FS, now they need to focus on 'behind the scenes' .
My requests seem to be common to quite a few simmers.