Jump to content

flyerkg

Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About flyerkg

  • Rank
    Flight Student - Groundwork

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thank you Mathijs and Teams. This looks well worth the wait. Keith
  2. These have been very nice screen shots lately. It has been a long wait but I appears to be worth the time. I am patiently awaiting the release on this Airbus. Keith
  3. Greetings, I agree with the many requests for multiple runway operations. I know for sometime now we have been using different techniques with AFCAD to get cross wind runways, but there are still some variables that prevent FSX from being superb in this area. In particular, we often times ask for options to other runways which are not primary active when real world weather and other physical conditions permit. While you can select different runways in the ATC pulldown menu, FSX does not always respond realistically. Nor do we ever hear AI voices requesting options for runway usage. Several smart guys came along with techniques in AFCAD to enhance our flight sim experience and I thank each of them for their hard work. I once got to a point when I was doing nothing but revising AFCAD files and perfecting my own things to upload to AVSIM and not flying anymore. It would be nice to say goodbye to star patterns and overlays with multiple afcads for effective cross-runway usage. AI has come a long way for flight simulation, but what about dumbing down the AI pilots? I know when I first started flying, I never had perfect radio communications. I wonder how difficult would it be for ATC and AI pilots in the next generation Flight Simulator to make mistakes or request to repeat calls? Instead of unrealistic hold-short durations, perhaps have AI give bad read-backs and clog the radios a bit. These are just a few things I hope Mathijs and team consider. Keith
  4. Mathijs, Thank you for the reply. I often times look at the available major German Airports and major hub airports from other countries and I am nearly speechless and I ask myself where is the equal quality for American airports? Where can I find a quality Dallas-Fort Worth KDFW, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington National and so forth for FSX? I am not a scenery designer and therefore do not complain, but I am able to spend a little money on high qualitity scenery enhancements. I just can't find much of what I had in FS9 and I'm sure in due time FSX addons will catch up. I just need to wait patiently. Keith
  5. I was pleased with the discussion and I thank Mathijs for sharing his interests and feelings about the flight sim community. I do hope there is interest within Aerosoft to develop more corporate or private aircraft addons. There was mention of Gulfstream. I have heard in several forums that Gulfstream has expressed a strong stance against supporting or endorsing the development of payware aircraft with their title and refuse to share performance knowledge. So perhaps there has been some conflict for the various developers. However, I have not seen a payware Learjet 23, 24, 25 or 35, Falcon 10, 20, 50. Please note these are all old aircraft but are still widely flown. Perhaps we might see small single engine turboprops such as the Piper Malibu Mirage or Socata TBM 700. The discussion about airport design for Flight Sim was great too. I have a better understanding of the administrative issues for getting onsite photography and data for airports. Now when I fly in FSX and come across gross inaccuracies in and around airports I can answer my old question, "Have they ever seen that airport???" with "the developer probably saw as much as possible". I'm concerned about how this might present difficulties for developing a new flight simulator. Thank you again. Keith
  6. I agree with your comments about San Diego. I have lived in San Diego for a few years and FSX San Diego scenery is disgusting. You can enhance with GEX and UTX and there is still too much to be added. I surely hope Aerosoft will consider San Diego soon. Keith
  7. All great discussions here! Combined Military and Civilian Flight Simulator A full campaign management system may not be the answer for a complete flight simulation package in the scenario that I described. I was almost prompted to write as I noticed my Falcon 4.0 binder sitting on the shelf. Yes, it is old and large and I can't remember what year it was when I last used it, so definitely the graphics engine from this very program would not be the answer either. Airspace management (Restricted Airspace and Military Operations Area) I'll try not to repeat the issue too much, but improved airspace management would be another preference for a new flight simulator. In FS you can fly anywhere at all times of the day or night. We all know this is not the case in reality. The previous comments about Area 51 is a great point. What if in the next generation of Flight Simulation you cannot fly into restricted airspace without AI fighters interdicting you/escorting you away from the airspace? The AI fighter could possibly command you to change course or destroy your aircraft due to your non-compliance. Has anyone considered enhancing MOAs with AI military aircraft flying? Periodic Airfield Maintenance Now that I have broached the subject of impossibilities... FS airport systems and runways never degrade or close. Perhaps consider a few conditions which force modified airfield operations such as damage to runway, taxiway, lights, communication, or navigation systems, based on theoretic AI and user activity. These conditions could be identified in NOTAMS as part of the flight planning process for certain airports. (SLOC Explosion) Keith
  8. I often hear suggestions to build deployable weapons into the next flight simulator and wonder would any developer ever consider taking a program like Falcon 4.0, improve the scenery to include civilian airports and program flyable Commercial and General Aviation into it. The mission builder would allow the user to generate civilian and military flights to include training missions and formations. Maybe this idea would be impractical. Keith
  9. It is good to hear suggestions for functions such as moving TACAN. Perhaps land and sea based TACAN would tremendously enhance the flight sim activities for simulated military ops. A similar enhancement might be for military AI planes to fly carrier patterns. Keith
  10. <b>Bridged taxiways/runways.&nbsp;&nbsp;</b> <span class="text_body">Leipzig/Halle </span> for FS2004 and FSX is the only scenery I am aware of that has modeled taxiways which pass above roadways. Yet, I once saw a forum post at another site where developers expressed that this is impossible to model. However Aerosoft has done so previously. <br>Other airports that would be enhanced with realistic 3D construction would be KPHX Phoenix, KATL Atlanta, KORD Chicago, KTPA, Tampa, KJFK New York, KIAH Houston, KDFW, Dallas, KMCO, Orlando, and Tokyo Narita and Haneda airports are just a few examples. I would even explore any scenery designer and or SDK that I could use to help design raised runways and or taxiways. <br><br><b>Improved communications and navigation for military. </b>Although there are many military aircraft addons for FS2004 and FSX, there is no genuine simulation of TACAN navigation or UHF radios in the cockpit. Another area of concern is to include ground controlled application (GCA-1) and or navigation<br>
×
×
  • Create New...