Page 10 of 15 FirstFirst ... 8 9 10 11 12 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 143

Thread: Considering FS9 to be dead?

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher12 View Post
    And thank you for all the superb Historic Jetliners Group aircraft. I almost feel HJG is a part of FS9 itself as it's played such a critical and long term role together with FS9. California Classics you could suggest the same. Invaluable add-ons and sites for what really was and still is the pinnacle of flight simulation, Flight Simulator 2004.
    Agreed. Planes like the HJG DC-10 and DC-8 is one of the best freewares you can get out there for FS2004

  2. Default

    I Like to think of Tom GIBSON's site as HJG's "sister" .... and that of David MALTBY HJG's "brother" .... each related to the extent they can probably be considered members of the same family by virtue of the fact they all try to do a similar job .... to try'n please those whom care to partake of their offerings

    And of course there are a number of other sites/groups whom can be accommodated into this extended family of FS specialists too ..... between us all we have the 1950's, 60's, 70's, 80's, 80's, and 2000's up to relatively recent times "covered/represented"

    I do agree that HJG is "a part of FS9 itself (it was formed back in 2000 .... and has transitioned through FS2000/FS2002/FS2004/and FSX too ..... the latter to some extent only). It will likely remain as-is though for "resource and other reasons" (as was explained recently to a very well intentioned prospector offering assistance) .... BUT .... that's the way it "IS" ans has to be/remain

    MRC
    Last edited by aerofoto; 10-27-2020 at 03:19 PM. Reason: additional data

  3. #93

    Default

    Maybe it is because FS2004 Century of Flight was the only major sim edition ever released with a historical focus in its stock form, that it has become a persistent favorite with vintage buffs.

    My new GW3 install is starting to get swollen with planes and scenery, and there have been some headaches. You can see that these add-ons evolved through a community that kept up with everything new. It's hard to reconstruct years later, from scratch. You download a package that seems cool, the readme tells you it requires you have installed 8 previous add-ons you don't want, half of those are from defunct sites and now cannot be found, several of them in turn each require 6 more add-ons you don't want, and it frankly admits there might be more required files that the author has had so long that he has forgotten that not everyone has them. I have contented myself with getting most of the add-ons mostly working. It's not exactly clear what-all scenery each mod adds, so it's a fun easter egg hunt flying around looking for built-out airports.

    I find that Flight Ontario's scenery for 160 Canadian WWII training bases fits nicely into GW3. It isn't strictly within the time period, but it works well with the ruralized countryside and doesn't step on GW3 or the major mods, which don't do too much with Canada. The bases are beautifully built and many are populated with 100+ static airplanes, which is a frame rate killer on FSX but doesn't slow down FS9 at all on a decent rig.

    The most amazing thing for me is how new stuff continues to come out for this old sim. These new Austers that just showed up on SOH are dandy planes, and the J-2 Arrow is near enough as never mind to a Taylorcraft BC-12D, a type that I've always liked but that nobody has seemed interested in doing for a flight sim.

    August

  4. #94

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Skywatcher12 View Post
    And thank you for all the superb Historic Jetliners Group aircraft. I almost feel HJG is a part of FS9 itself as it's played such a critical and long term role together with FS9.
    +1

    Hi,
    I found out about HJG only last year, after I got interested in 3-engine jetliners, the L-1011 and later the B727. And they came with this INS (which I didn't know about until then) and working WX radars, and those great panels...

    I'm sticking with FS9 for now. I may give FS2020 a try, eventually, when (if?) it'll be "finished".

    Regards,
    DDP.

  5. #95

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by K5083 View Post
    Maybe it is because FS2004 Century of Flight was the only major sim edition ever released with a historical focus in its stock form, that it has become a persistent favorite with vintage buffs.

    My new GW3 install is starting to get swollen with planes and scenery, and there have been some headaches. You can see that these add-ons evolved through a community that kept up with everything new. It's hard to reconstruct years later, from scratch. You download a package that seems cool, the readme tells you it requires you have installed 8 previous add-ons you don't want, half of those are from defunct sites and now cannot be found, several of them in turn each require 6 more add-ons you don't want, and it frankly admits there might be more required files that the author has had so long that he has forgotten that not everyone has them. I have contented myself with getting most of the add-ons mostly working. It's not exactly clear what-all scenery each mod adds, so it's a fun easter egg hunt flying around looking for built-out airports.

    I find that Flight Ontario's scenery for 160 Canadian WWII training bases fits nicely into GW3. It isn't strictly within the time period, but it works well with the ruralized countryside and doesn't step on GW3 or the major mods, which don't do too much with Canada. The bases are beautifully built and many are populated with 100+ static airplanes, which is a frame rate killer on FSX but doesn't slow down FS9 at all on a decent rig.

    The most amazing thing for me is how new stuff continues to come out for this old sim. These new Austers that just showed up on SOH are dandy planes, and the J-2 Arrow is near enough as never mind to a Taylorcraft BC-12D, a type that I've always liked but that nobody has seemed interested in doing for a flight sim.

    August
    Thanks for your interesting and motivated statements.

    Nevertheless, all these addons you mention remain just selective improvements. It's an indubitable fact that GW3 is mostly limited to several dozens U.S. airfields, fortunately once very nicely done by a couple of meritorious 'The Old Hangar' supporters. But as we know, vintage flying was already done in the whole world. The deficit is obvious.

    I could admit that vintage world isn't such attractive and fascinating than hyper photorealistic environments. On the other hand it suprise me that f.i. the CF2 community still remain quite creative. Probably boming towns and aircraft carriers might be more exciting than flying slowly and thoughtfully over sparsely populated landscapes! So let's improve GW3 as best as we can. Every new and especially innovative input will be higly welcomed and appreciated.

    Bernard

  6. #96

    Default

    The brilliance of the basic GW3 package, at least on my first impression as a newcomer to it, is that the global landclass revisions and the AI traffic give the entire world a basic vintage look-and-feel. Combined with an environment upgrade such as the converted orbx textures, this makes a typical vintage flying experience - let's say, ferrying a Stuart Green Fokker D.VII from my local airport at White Plains up the Hudson to Old Rhinebeck around sunset - about as nice and visually rich an experience as can be had in any sim. The airports are enjoyable and quirky and it would always be nicer to see more of them, but there are plenty. Even the cars are fun to drive around, although I have no immediate plans to uninstall GTA-5.

    One can always collect other third-party airports, some that are explicitly historic and others that are just of small fields that haven't changed much over the decades.

  7. #97

    Default

    One of the great things about GW3 is the era didn't have the most advanced/complicated airports. If a person has ADE or instant scenery, they could build some nifty little airfields with vintage objects and set up their own traffic.
    I'm not much for flights over more than an hour or two, so I'm getting ready to set up a few airfields in and around KY, dipping slightly into IN, IL, WV, TN, OH, and MO. Trying to keep it pre 1940.
    FS9=Flight sim sandbox

  8. #98
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    1,039

    Default

    Speaking of being 'dead', does Flight1 now no longer sell FS9 products? They have no link to anything FS9 related.

    Just give em away for free then of you think no one wants them.

  9. #99

    Default

    What about this?
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Screenshot 2020-10-28 165628.png 
Views:	12 
Size:	162.9 KB 
ID:	223459
    To view my repaints and other stuff just click on the image below!

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JSMR View Post
    Speaking of being 'dead', does Flight1 now no longer sell FS9 products? They have no link to anything FS9 related.

    Just give em away for free then of you think no one wants them.
    I try and avoid anything Flight1 because of their million and one ridiculous anti piracy measures. Simply getting something from one PC to another can be a nightmare.

Page 10 of 15 FirstFirst ... 8 9 10 11 12 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. considering new monitor for fs9
    By flightsimmer747 in forum PC Hardware, Video And Audio Help
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-07-2008, 08:58 PM
  2. Considering Flight Lessons
    By Continental737 in forum The Outer Marker
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-04-2004, 03:54 PM
  3. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-07-2002, 06:51 PM
  4. Considering FS2002
    By aep in forum FS2002
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 07-04-2002, 04:18 PM
  5. To those considering adding RAM
    By eagle013 in forum FS2002
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-03-2002, 04:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •