Martin:

Thanks for your interest in FSFS2009 and for taking the time to write to us about it in such depth.

>> I use the registered version FS Flying Scool 2009 with FSX for some time now and have experienced some behaviour that I don't expected. Perhaps I have some wrong expectations or maybe I found some general problems. It would be fine if you could give some comments about these things.

Sure! Where possible I will direct you to the manual.

>> - I will be asked to switch on taxi lights, strobe lights, and nav lights at daylight vmc conditions. What are the conditions that are used to decide when you have to switch these lights on?

This is on page 40.

>> - Is the announcement of heights referring to airport level or to ground level? When flying to an airport which is located on a plateau, I sometimes got the impression, that the announcements of the height are too low relative to the airport level.

We figure you can use your altimeter (correctly set of course), but for AGL data it is useful if your instructor can call on the radar altimeter he keeps "in his head" as it were. It can be very difficult to judge AGL in FS and so we figured the sim pilot needs some help. So - the instructor is talking AGL when he calls off heights.

>> - In circuit mode you are asked about a flight plan when you have not filed one. Of course you can file a plan where departure and arrival is the same airport, but it might be clear that you would like to land on the airport where you are practicing circuits.

>> Some effects I have noticed which seem to be not optimal. All of them I have experienced with a C172:

>> - When doing the rudder check after connecting to FSX you get the correct messages "... check complete" but when you are finished with this the instructor tells you "It's a good idea to check the function of ...". which has obviously happened only a few seconds ago.

The "It's a good idea..." phrase plays quite soon after the pilot starts the session with FSFS. We figured that most folks will not have done much by the time it plays. You are clearly getting off to a faster start with your checks and are to be commended on your habits!

>> Start:
- "We are ready to rotate" and immediately after this "OK lets rotate"
That leads to the message in the logbook "Late rotation..." but you had no time to react after the first message.

There is always a delay between the two as the former gets triggered at an appreciably lower IAS than the latter. They may be close together - this would depend on the plane and acceleration at that time. It is certainly possible to takeoff after the first free 'warning' before the second 'penalty' phrase kicks in.

>> Landing
- When you are too high at final, you get the message "You are too high" but when you react on this and push the elevator a bit more you get the advice "Don't descent too fast". That is a problem, because you have no other choice to comply with the first advice beside reducing the throttle. If you are too high to descent with normal elevator movement maybe the recommendation of a go around makes more sense.

There are parameters in place to account for these factors. You will not be told to reduce throttle if doing so would bring you to a dangerously slow speed. Usually, you will reduce throttle if you are above the GS.

>> - When you are too slow on final (e.g. 60kn), but also too high, you sometimes get the message: "Not so much throttle." That might be a dangerous advice.

See above and... our main beta test showed that folks did not want to be told and expected to comply with go around instructions. We are dealing with everything from a c152 to a b747 and going around can take a long time.

We have to achieve a fine balance between giving folks a taste of flight training and... fun! We could have the instructor terminate the flight with zero points if the pilot did not do those control surface checks, but that would make some folks very unhappy. Sure, the instructor could instead always insist on it and carry on with the flight, but again - this would be too rigid for some people. We have to balance fun and realism.

>> Some proposals

>> - Sometimes the shape of a traffic pattern of an uncontrolled airport is restricted by surrounding controlled airspaces (e.g. at EDLE). It would be nice if one could influence the shape of the traffic pattern to be flown in the circuit mode (e.g. in a configuration file). One possibility might be to configure the turning points for crosswind to base and base to downwind by giving the coordinates of vectors relative to the reference point of the circuit.

This is a very interesting idea and we are looking at it!

>> - When started with flaps too far extended, a warning might be useful.

Again very interesting - thanks.

>> - The recommendation of a go around might be useful under several conditions when a normal landing might be a problem.

Please see above.

>> - Optional observation of com usage in a pattern might be useful (e.g. announcing turn to downwind)

Again very interesting - thanks.

>> And one final question: Flight Parameters on the Flight Plan page:
Does it make sense to enter any parameters for V1,Vr,V2 when you are flying a small aircraft e.g. a C172? What values do you recommend when you normally have only values for Vr, Vx, Vy?

Well - you will hear the instructor call them out if you enter them and many folks feel that this adds to the experience. To be honest, I'd go to the web to look for values.

Thanks again for all the work - this is just the sort of feedback we love to get.

Good luck with FSFS and...

Happy Landings!