------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------ OK, naysayers. Fine, be that way... But I commend anyone who takes the time to make such a kit. I think it's incredibly cool--just like the various emulations from the paper versions to the simulator versions to the real copies. They all took a great deal of thought and planning. "Dissing" something like this reminds me of when I still had a shot at flying for my once great company. One of the chief pilots in charge of (pilot) hiring had _nothing_ good to say about simulators at all. He especially _hated_ any PC version of a fltsim. In point of fact, ual had one of the best pilot training programs on the planet, and guess what(?), like all airlines, they train in the sim (full motion, awesomely realistic). The final checkride is in the real thing (to my knowledge, the final checkouts were done on revenue flights). Sims must not be all that bad, eh? Not everyone has access to full motion sims--in fact, almost no one does... I fell in love with the first sim I ever saw. It was a "terrain modeling board" based T-37 full motion sim. Later, we got to fly the cgi versions (which were nightime only, due to the limited graphics capabilities available when they were made). T-38 sims were all cgi based (No mechinal stuff to break down, and it was the instrumentation that they were interested in). In 1980, this stuff seemed "spaced-aged" (esp. the cgi sims, which were crude by today's standards). I've been following PC based fltsims since the early days (and they really were crude by today's standards). There are those who still have nothing good to say about PC-based sims, but I can't say enough good about them. Apparently, a difference in perception... (And, yes, I acknowledge that there is no substitute for the real thing, but they truly are one of the most efficient ways ever devised to turn gold into thin air, and they take up a lot of space and need lots of care and attention! It's definitely a trade-off...) Regards, Bob Greenstreet