airbus

Contact Microsoft, maybe they can answer your great question.

Solotwo wrote:

Contact Microsoft, maybe they can answer your great question.

😂 😂 😂 Holy thats funny as hell

Donno about Microsoft..But if you can wait then PMDG is coming up with Airbus A-320 for FSX...It will take some time...

Like I said, give Microsoft a call.

pokey1694 wrote:

what about the 777

There is nothing that I, U or Microsoft can do anything about it now...Anyways it's good that they did not include the 777.Anyways the default Boeings in MSFS are very boring and unrealistic to fly...Better Microsoft leaves this job to the Commercial Addon developers....

I'd be content if FSX and FS9 came without any planes to begin with because for the most part, most of them are rubbish.

A flightsim that ships without planes.. 🤔 somehow I just don't think people would understand

I know what Solotwo is getting at ! We pay £50/£60 (sorry don't know the dollar equivalent) and then spend months, if not years,trying to get our flightsim as realistic as possible, and more often than not, these fantastic freeware designers give us TOP QUALITY aircraft and scenery far and above anything in the product that we have spent our hard earned cash on. I know some of you will say that i'm just being picky and go on about development costs and so on, but lets not forget, Microsoft is one of the richest companies in the World, so surely they could deliver a quality product at a decent price without having to addon to improve it!

I hate freeware, most of the time its garbage.

Sorry Solotwo have i caught you in a bad mood, because i've never found anything from Project Opensky, IFDG,Project Fokker, Eric Cantu or Kittyhawk to be anything other than excellent, to name but a few.

Solo2 is always in a bad mood ever since FSXs release 🙂 (and I find it quite funny)

Welshflyer wrote:

Sorry Solotwo have i caught you in a bad mood, because i've never found anything from Project Opensky, IFDG,Project Fokker, Eric Cantu or Kittyhawk to be anything other than excellent, to name but a few.

Do the planes from them have a realistic flight model? I do not know hence I am asking?
Do they have their Boeings with the same quality as that of PMDG??

I don't think Microsoft could make the software that much better to be honest. The Scenery can be bland in places, but if Ms made the scenery as good as some of these addons then the Sim would require a huge amount of Harddrive space and would require a good spec PC to make it all look nice. I'm perfectly happy with the included aircraft, but buying the extra addon aircrafts makes the experience more fun in my opinion.

Welshflyer wrote:

Sorry Solotwo have i caught you in a bad mood, because i've never found anything from Project Opensky, IFDG,Project Fokker, Eric Cantu or Kittyhawk to be anything other than excellent, to name but a few.

Haha, not in a bad mood, I'm just addicted to payware and I've never really been truely satisfied by any freeware before I found payware. But I understand that there is plenty of decent freeware that some people are plenty happy with.

to_coolguys, the flight models seem pretty good to me, and yes the graphic quality is just as good as the PMDG models( i have the 737 600/700) you really should check them out, especially Project Opensky, IFDG and SGA(for their excellent MD 80/90 models).

Welshflyer, I see that you're a member now. Welcome 🍻 . You'll have to get a avatar now that you're part of the crew. 🙂

Thank you CRJCapt, i really had to become a member because of all the fantastic help i've had from the good people here at Flyaway and i would really like to give some back! As for the Avatar i have no idea what to do.

ok. back on topic, why did fsx not include the airbus A380? but no, they put in an airbus that no one cares about. this is for you, microsoft

meppers wrote:

ok. back on topic, why did fsx not include the airbus A380? but no, they put in an airbus that no one cares about. this is for you, microsoft

First let the Airbus get A-380 perfect ....

meppers wrote:

ok. back on topic, why did fsx not include the airbus A380? but no, they put in an airbus that no one cares about. this is for you, microsoft

Oh for the love of god. If you don't like it don't buy it and stop posting stupid thoughtless comments on here.

The planes arent very realistic. I spent a couple of hours with wikipedia and the aircraft cfg setting the real max weights, fuel loads, engine power, etc. Most were off by a couple of hundred lbs at least.

mossy wrote:

The planes arent very realistic. I spent a couple of hours with wikipedia and the aircraft cfg setting the real max weights, fuel loads, engine power, etc. Most were off by a couple of hundred lbs at least.

I think M.S's intention was to provide the platform for flight simulation, rather perfecting it right from the start. They were aware that most would probably go out and download add-ons or buy payware that was far more realistic, so with that information at hand, why would they even bother trying to do something which would only prove to be a waste of time and efforts?

My 2 cents. No offense intended of course 😉

crosscheck9 wrote:

I think M.S's intention was to provide the platform for flight simulation, rather perfecting it right from the start. They were aware that most would probably go out and download add-ons or buy payware that was far more realistic, so with that information at hand, why would they even bother trying to do something which would only prove to be a waste of time and efforts?

My 2 cents. No offense intended of course 😉

Same here.I would be more than happy if MS provides a good rock solid base for commercial addons to build on.Because some addons like PMDG did go all their way round for some limitations in FS 9.So if MS in talks with these commercial companies is able to provide a good base then i would be more than happy...Anyways MS has done a good job....

yeh I agree there, but so many people dont even know about add ons, so I think ms should at least make a slightly bigger effort.