Simviation, what bugs you about some addons/What decides if they will stay in your hangar?

[Fishbed7701]

I always wondered peoples standards for aircraft they download, whether it be freeware or payware. What decides if it is an aircraft you like? For me its usually the textures, and for that reason, I can't stand PAD's aircraft(no offense to them), they just look so unrealistic. Another thing would be the landing gear animation. I have not found an A330 for fs that accurately simulates the gear animation for it. I really hate when landing gear sinks into the runway. After all, touchdown is the most fun part, and the gear are the star of the show. Anyway, lets hear your thoughts.

[machineman9]

I fly from the virtual cockpit. If the plane doesn't have one, I am hesitant about downloading it. I can use the 2D display, but I find it a bit distracting.

Ultimately it is about how the plane feels and if everything is working okay. The outside textures aren't a huge deal to me, just so long as it goes up and lands again.

[Xpand]

I'm a huge pain in the @*s when it comes to pick models. I look for any fault on the model, texture or Flight Dynamics. I guess that's due to my 6 years of modeling aircraft for FSX and having to have something like a watchmaker's eye to spot any mistakes from my part. A smoothing problem is enough to keep me from saving the plane in my hangar. Like Kaz Ito's models. They are gorgeous when you open them up in gmax and take away the smooth excess, but the man keeps pushing the smoothing to high and then they look all bumpy and weird. It looks like they're made out of plastic...

[FSX_Dude]

I fly from the virtual cockpit. If the plane doesn't have one, I am hesitant about downloading it. I can use the 2D display, but I find it a bit distracting.

Ultimately it is about how the plane feels and if everything is working okay. The outside textures aren't a huge deal to me, just so long as it goes up and lands again.

Thats what I think too,if it don't have a VC I'm not downloading but No offense to the designers

[Steve M]

I'm partial to realistic, clickable vc's and cockpits that are modeled with a 360 degree view. Most craft I keep in my hanger are made for FSX and not portovers from previous sims. Saying that, my hat is off to all freeware developers because I couldn't even so much as draw up a door handle in GMax.         

[Club508]

My typical standards are:
Must include both a 2D panel and 3D virtual cockpit.
Must have sound.

[Fishbed7701]

Yeah, I forgot to mentions, that if an airplane has no VC, its a no go for me. I do all of my flying out of the VC except for looking around during cruise and landing. Also, usually occurring in portovers, the glass is either missing or transparent, and if its a prop, chances are they are transparent too. And one thing that I've wondered is that why don't most payware products airplanes, particularly airliners, come with touchdown smoke effects, instead of using the boring default ones?

[andy190]

In the planes I download, I like to have a VC. Even a basic one is better than none at all. It has to have working gauges in the vc which some portovers don't have. Though if I like the plane I

[Fozzer]

I am easy-going when it comes to aircraft!... ..!

For me, all it needs is a good, practical, 2D cockpit, (for me to improve with my FS Panel Studio), and is suitable for the particular flight I decide to experience.
The external appearance is of no particular importance to me, as I spend most/all of the time inside the aircraft, looking out of the windscreen!
I use most of the aircraft in my Hangar as a simple means of exploring the scenery below me....
...I am an Explorer first....Pilot second... ...!
Only a few different types of aircraft fulfil all my needs, for my type of flying....

Microlight: Sunday afternoon fun.
Cessna 150/152: Low level exploration.
Beech Baron: A bit faster than the Cessna. Tours!
Beech King Air: A few passengers, short hops (shopping).
Learet45: Fast, Personal Jet.
Boeing 737-400: Lots of passengers with Bermuda shorts, and straw hats!

That about the lot...and all of them default/freeware!

...its all about FUN!... [smiley=2vrolijk_08.gif]...!

Paul....Indiana Jones of the air... 8-)...!

[Hagar]

I stick to freeware & have never considered paying for an FS aircraft. I don't "fly" much nowadays except for checking new addons for other people. Being an ex-aeromodeller I do most of my sim flying from outside the cockpit so I look for an accurate 3D external model & decent textures. The cockpit is not important to me.

[jetprop]

i only

[FoxThree]

- A good VC that's mostly clickable.
- Good/believable flight dynamics.
- External model is not that important to me since about 99% of my flying time is spent in the VC.

[alrot]

- External model is not that important to me since about 99% of my flying time is spent in the VC.

that's what always said , why spending so much time making the exterior when you re really inside the airplane most of the time ?
personally I spend the 80% of the hard time developing the VC, other modelers spend all their energy in the exterior AND THEN the VC is not so good ,see what I mean ?   

[Dave71K]

Basically I want my aircraft to be as realistic as possible.

Like most of you if a plane hasn't got a V.C then it doesn't go in my hanger.   

The next most important thing is flight dynamics if it's a Boeing 747 and it handles like a Extra 300 it gets deleted.

And then it's frame rates. I have a few addons like a posky ERJ145 that totally kills my fps.

For  a long time I was strictly freeware only but I then wanted a FMC so bought the QW757 and I've not looked back since. The quality you get from payware transforms FSX .

With that said credit to the freeware developers who make some amazing aircraft.

[jetprop]

fps is also one of my necesities,if its under 6 then its most likely gone soon,unless it looks great.