What are some must have addons for fs2004 ?

[jgf]

4 hours ago, JSkorna said:

Says someone else who knows very little about MSFS.

 

I know I do not want it, and am happy with Fs2004.  Anything wrong with that?

 

Have I made any erroneous statements?

 

Yes, we should remain on topic, but threads, like conversations, meander all the time.  And opinions should be welcome, whether or not someone disagrees.

[Skywatcher12]

10 hours ago, JSkorna said:

 

Sorry, no we don't. And please don't start trying to proclaim what MSFS has or doesn't have. Let it be known that Mark owned and used MSFS for zero minutes, zero seconds; lifetime.

Mark wants a flight sim!
You don't need to own something to determine it's quality. MSFS was a complete joke on release and probably still is. If not for the graphics, are you telling me people seriously would've bought it? C'mon, you're being silly now. No one would've touched it. I have no idea where it is today but I'm sure really basic things are still totally missing. Are seasons available yet? Is weather available that is not realtime so you can sync flight weather to time of flight? Can you fill major airports with AI like you can in FS9? Throwing some simple things out there.

 

It's lucky I don't own it cause then I could really tell you how much it's lacking.

Oh, just realized, aren't we talking about a redundant sim? Isn't MSFS getting replaced? So much for 10 years out of it! Empty your pockets again and welcome all the new bugs the new version brings! Have fun!
 

[defaid]

9 minutes ago, leuen said:

Who is Mark? And what says AnySajmon, the OP? Obviously nothing. So let's still improving FS9 as best as we can and forget everything else!

 

Bernard

 

But I've just bought myself a bag of popcorn.

[JSkorna]

10 hours ago, jgf said:

 

I know I do not want it, and am happy with Fs2004.  Anything wrong with that?

 

Have I made any erroneous statements?

 

Yes, we should remain on topic, but threads, like conversations, meander all the time.  And opinions should be welcome, whether or not someone disagrees.

"At least new ones aren't being added every week."

 

Opinions are fine, ignorance is not.

[JSkorna]

5 hours ago, Skywatcher12 said:

Mark wants a flight sim!
You don't need to own something to determine it's quality. MSFS was a complete joke on release and probably still is. If not for the graphics, are you telling me people seriously would've bought it? C'mon, you're being silly now. No one would've touched it. I have no idea where it is today but I'm sure really basic things are still totally missing. Are seasons available yet? Is weather available that is not realtime so you can sync flight weather to time of flight? Can you fill major airports with AI like you can in FS9? Throwing some simple things out there.

 

It's lucky I don't own it cause then I could really tell you how much it's lacking.

Oh, just realized, aren't we talking about a redundant sim? Isn't MSFS getting replaced? So much for 10 years out of it! Empty your pockets again and welcome all the new bugs the new version brings! Have fun!
 

You really don't know how foolish you sound right now. Have fun hijacking posts while I go fly a real flightsim.

[JSMR]

1 hour ago, JSkorna said:

You really don't know how foolish you sound right now. Have fun hijacking posts while I go fly a real flightsim.

That’s a quote a 13 yr old would say. Maybe stick to the kids forums, Jim. 
 

Anyway, on with the show! 
There’s SO much freeware available to enhance FS9. And while this isn’t technically about freeware, it’s always a good place to start. 
 

Clouds

Sky

Trees

Grass 

Ground Textures

Airport / Runway / Taxiway textures 

 

Then add in the tons of awesome freeware aircraft and airports of all eras, and it doesn’t get any better then FS9. The last (and best) of the flight simulators by Microsoft. 
 

 

Glory, Glory to FS9'ers

Glory, Glory to FS9'ers

Glory, Glory  to FS9'ers

As FS9 goes marching ON ON ON!!!!!

 

 

 

 

[JSkorna]

I don't care what you think. You just keep singing those little songs in your head. You know what they say about those people, right?

[JSMR]

On 9/2/2023 at 3:39 AM, AnySajmon said:

I have FS2004 century of flight and recently i have been thinking about getting some addons for better flight sim experience. What are some must have addons that make the flight sim more realistic or just improve the simulator in any way ? I will be glad with any form of advice or help.

https://www.freewarescenery.com/fs2004/world.html

 

Lots of good stuff here to use. 

[FS10inator]

I've made a list of addons and settings I use for my FS2004 setup to enhance the sim's visuals.

It's loosely based on the Short Final video mentioned in an earlier post in this thread.

The only textures I've modified myself are the Dark Blue sky textures from FE9.

 

PDF also attached just in case.

FS10inator's addons and settings for FS2004.pdf

[lordhearteater]

When I got my new Win11 PC last year, I put a comprehensive installation of FSX on it. I had not flown FS9 since 2012, but had a lot of my old comprehensive install backed up. I now have a decent FS9 setup on my Win10 PC that the grandkids are learning to fly on. Alas, I do not seem to be able to get a working EditVoicepack ability for it, but I already had a pretty comprehensive voicepack from a decade ago. The Beech Starship (VC version; not Mike Stone's) is wonderful in FS9, but misses something in FSX. Ditto the Venaviones Turbo Commander.

MSFS was on the agenda to acquire this year, but the MSFS24 announcement came out. I'll be flying FSX with a sprinkling of FS9 for another year or two, at least. Hopefully, all of the things that I have read about MSFS that led me to delay/ignore it will be remedied in MSFS24.

The essential message of this thread is a King Crimson title: Be Happy With What You Have to be Happy With.

[Adrian K]

Keep the discussion clean please.

 

I have hidden several posts where members were just bickering.

 

Keep it clean and relevant.

 

Thank you.

 

 

[NikeHerk67]

Personally, I like FS2004 as it was the first MSFS flight simulator that allowed developers to do just about anything to make it even better. I'd go so far as to say there was much more enthusiasm for it then as well. I'm sure it sold a lot of super fast computers at that time as well.  

FS Navigator is an incredible add-on to make your flying experiences so much more enjoyable and it has always been free. 

https://en.freedownloadmanager.org/Windows-PC/FSNavigator.html

RADAR CONTACT is also another great add-on, which is much more realistic that the stock ATC that it comes with.

https://www.simflight.com/2019/01/22/radar-contact-v4-3-at-no-charge/

 

For anyone interested in both flying and navigation, these 2 adds will give you about all you need. They're both functional vs other add-ons that are most eye candy.

 

 

[JSMR]

6 hours ago, NikeHerk67 said:

 

https://en.freedownloadmanager.org/Windows-PC/FSNavigator.html

RADAR CONTACT is also another great add-on, which is much more realistic that the stock ATC that it comes with.

https://www.simflight.com/2019/01/22/radar-contact-v4-3-at-no-charge/

 

 

 

 

Does that run on windows 10? I cant get it to work. 

[johnhinson]

8 hours ago, NikeHerk67 said:

FS Navigator is an incredible add-on to make your flying experiences so much more enjoyable and it has always been free. 

https://en.freedownloadmanager.org/Windows-PC/FSNavigator.html

 

That has been said so many times but is incorrect. The download is free but if you don't have a registration code, it will only work for twenty uses. New registrations are not available.

 

It does claim to offer free registration to one in 30 users.

 

John

[jgf]

6 minutes ago, johnhinson said:

That has been said so many times but is incorrect. The download is free but if you don't have a registration code, it will only work for twenty uses. New registrations are not available.

 

It does claim to offer free registration to one in 30 users.

 

John

 

But since it's been impossible to register for years (the site disappeared), many people have uploaded their codes so it's not difficult to get one.  I do not deem this inappropriate since the original creator is not being deprived of anything.  (BTW, I thought it only worked for thirty minutes at a time until registered.)

[JSMR]

20 hours ago, NikeHerk67 said:

P

RADAR CONTACT is also another great add-on, which is much more realistic that the stock ATC that it comes with.

https://www.simflight.com/2019/01/22/radar-contact-v4-3-at-no-charge/

 

 

 

 

Finally got it wto work. DLL issue. 

Anyway, thoughts on finally trying RC4.3 for the first time. Only 1 flight for review. 
Good and bad. 
 

Thoughts : 

 

Voices horribly robotic. Worse then default. Have just downloaded the meatwater packages so hopefully that improves the voices. 

Cleared to lineup and wait on the runway. A jet was departing so RC directed me right into the path of a taking off jet. And a small aircraft was on a 1 mile final and had to go around when I eventually taxied onto the runway. Default atc wouldn't have allowed either of that. 
So by directing you and AI, RC seemingly does a poor job. Strange. 

 

TOD was given 40+ miles before it was needed. Although it did say when ready I believe. I didn't descend until I had to, and once good thing is ATC didn't give me constant messages to descend. 

 

It gives height restrictions on climb, but also clears you WELL before you reach them unlike default which is always last minute.  I think I can put in restrictions which would be reasonably realistic but it would be nice to have it randomly stop you in climb for traffic etc before continuing. 

Only 1 flight but I'll give it some more time and see if it improves somewhat. 



 

[defaid]

On 9/9/2023 at 3:16 PM, JSMR said:

Voices horribly robotic. Worse then default. Have just downloaded the meatwater packages so hopefully that improves the voices. 

A jet was departing so RC directed me right into the path of a taking off jet. 

 

TOD was given 40+ miles before it was needed.
 

 

It's been a while since I used RC. I'm too happy to up the sim rate if I'm pressed for time, and RC doesn't like it.

 

Yes, the original voices were terribly slow & mechanical. The Meatwater packs are a big improvement in terms of speed: almost natural. The only thing I don't like about the voices is that accents are fixed so don't match the part of the world in which you are flying. I'm using Graham Jackson as pilot and Dale Collins as co-pilot. Geri Jackson & Ray Proudfoot (mods the RC forum over ar Avsim) are my favourite controllers but Gerhard Brouwer seemed oddly appropriate in S America. Geri particularly sounds as though she's wearing a blue-grey uniform and working in a Nissen hut.

 

I've never been directed into a conflict: it seems I've just been lucky.

 

Controllers aim to have you down and level by 40 nm from the airport; I suspect TOD is based on 300 or 500 fpm. I think it's possible to decline by selecting the arrival notams checkbox in the controller info page while setting up but I've never bothered. If you aren't intending to follow a STAR and are expecting vectors to, say, a localiser then you'll probably also have to notify the controller once you are able (or willing) to resume following their instructions. Also, Notams or not, somewhere on the rather wide downwind leg, you should be able to ask for a short final.

 

D

 

[JSMR]

On 9/14/2023 at 6:30 AM, leuen said:

 

Nice to see that the ORBX textures converted for FS9 obviously and finally have been legalized. 

 

Bernard 

Que? 

[JSMR]

I see the list. And the freeware texture package you are referring to. Which I use. I’ve used several versions of it.

[JSMR]

5 hours ago, leuen said:

 

 

It's funny: when once I asked here to share an unavaible model, there was a huge uproar over copyrights etc. Now a texture conversion that was previously considered illegal should no longer be taboo. Very strange. So let's see:

 

ORBX, GLOBAL TEXTURE (Converted for FS2004) V.5.4 (mediafire.com)

I contacted the ORBX guys when I first heard about it many years ago. They told me it had nothing to do with them. It wasn’t their product and even it it was, it wouldn’t work in FS9. 

And that was enough for me to download it and use it. 

 

 

[JSMR]

On 9/10/2023 at 12:15 PM, defaid said:

 

It's been a while since I used RC. I'm too happy to up the sim rate if I'm pressed for time, and RC doesn't like it.

 

 

Yes the meatwater package improves it dramatically. I did a nice flight yesterday in my 727-100 flying for Retro United. ATC directed me nicely onto 28L. So much more interesting to use then default. I like it. 

[Skywatcher12]

17 hours ago, JSMR said:

I contacted the ORBX guys when I first heard about it many years ago. They told me it had nothing to do with them. It wasn’t their product and even it it was, it wouldn’t work in FS9. 

And that was enough for me to download it and use it. 

 

 

Maybe the guy who created it just used the ORBX name to get downloads initially.

[Skywatcher12]

23 hours ago, leuen said:

 

 

It's funny: when once I asked here to share an unavaible model, there was a huge uproar over copyrights etc. Now a texture conversion that was previously considered illegal should no longer be taboo. Very strange. So let's see:

 

ORBX, GLOBAL TEXTURE (Converted for FS2004) V.5.4 (mediafire.com)

This copyright thing across the board is totally ridiculous.
There is no consistency to any of it.

[jgf]

Probably because the precedent is still "old fashioned" concepts of hard copy books and patents.  Laws still haven't caught up with the internet, so "rights" are to a degree whatever someone claims.

 

Strictly speaking, if you do not actively protect whatever rights you claim you have little recourse legally.  Hence MS' aggressive attitude towards their old software;  they no longer sell it (thus are making no money from it), no longer update it, no longer support it, but will come down on you with both feet if you openly hack it, crack it, or try to profit from it.  As opposed to the tons of "abandoned" software out there which you can freely download and use;  if whoever "owns" that software has not been actively trying to control its distribution (demand its removal from download sites, publish notices that it is not freeware, etc.) they can expect little sympathy from the courts if they suddenly decide to bring infringement suits against anyone.

 

I think the idea of "abandonware" needs to be addressed.  After a certain time of no support by the owner (statute of limitations for most things is seven years, though only three years for some civil matters;  either is feasible for this) the program is considered public domain ...abandoned.

[loki]

7 hours ago, jgf said:

Probably because the precedent is still "old fashioned" concepts of hard copy books and patents.  Laws still haven't caught up with the internet, so "rights" are to a degree whatever someone claims.

 

Strictly speaking, if you do not actively protect whatever rights you claim you have little recourse legally.  Hence MS' aggressive attitude towards their old software;  they no longer sell it (thus are making no money from it), no longer update it, no longer support it, but will come down on you with both feet if you openly hack it, crack it, or try to profit from it.  As opposed to the tons of "abandoned" software out there which you can freely download and use;  if whoever "owns" that software has not been actively trying to control its distribution (demand its removal from download sites, publish notices that it is not freeware, etc.) they can expect little sympathy from the courts if they suddenly decide to bring infringement suits against anyone.

 

I think the idea of "abandonware" needs to be addressed.  After a certain time of no support by the owner (statute of limitations for most things is seven years, though only three years for some civil matters;  either is feasible for this) the program is considered public domain ...abandoned.

You are right that intellectual property laws haven't entirely caught up, however, one doesn't need to actively protect copyrights (trademarks, I believe, do need more active protection). In most, if not all Western countries, you get the copyright the minute you create something, and keep it until either the time period runs out (which is far too long these days thanks to Disney and other large corporations), or you sign the rights over to someone else. There is no requirement to actively police it, and just because you stop selling it doesn't mean it's now open for others to use. Microsoft and Nintendo have the resources to go after people, whereas few individuals or small companies do, but this doesn't change the validity of the copyright. It's unfair to expect an individual developer or small team to devote the, often significant, resources to continually police download sites, and could even bankrupt them.

 

Abandonware is still technically covered by copyright, and the sites distributing it largely get away with it either by being in a different country, or they are banking on no one coming after them. One way of addressing this would be cutting back the length of time copyrights apply to software so they fall into the public domain much sooner. These days in many countries it's life of the creator plus 50 years, or more. Given how fast technology and computing changes, these time frames are far, far too long.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries'_copyright_lengths