Hey,I enjoyed all your screenshots of the past days, but could you at least post one screeny with the 737NG Panel lights illuminated and will we have an option to choose between the intensity (dimmed, bright)?greetings from TXLPatrick H.

I'm told the SAS -600 have HUD's too. Will that be part of the model?Regards

Hi Patrick,As the airplane comes together more and more, we will be updating our web page more regularly. You should be seeing many more pics in the coming days, including the night illumination of the cockpit :)Vin ScimonePMDGwww.precisionmanuals.comhttp://www.vinscimone.com/dancnkid.gif

hey Vin,good news, I

Do you have any plans to use photorealistic bitmaps for your panel/overhead/throttle/radios and external views? I personally think that this kind of eye candle enhances the feeling of "real" simulation significantly. (having that DF737 overhead in mind). Anyway, I am glad that you are making the 737NG - longly awaited!greetings

ok, First off,before someone else posts,ya gotta include your full name,its this forums number 1 rule and they(PMDG) strictly enforce it. I would tend to agree with you that the DF734 provides a good emersion factor by using photorealistic bitmaps,but only because they've done it right. Having used the likes of other rendered cockpits(I shouldnt name the company),I can see why you like the photorealism so much, but having said that-a properly and professionaly rendered cockpit can be equally as emersive and realistic as that of a photorealistic one(IMHO). Take a look at the photos,Marc Harrington certainly knows his stuff. Thats a long winded explanation of why PMDG have gone the rendered route,so the moral of the passage above?I'd say you'll even forget that its rendered once you sit into this beauty ;)RegardsJohn Mc Avinuehttp://www.bavirtual.co.ukP 2.53 GHZ512 RAMWINXPGFORCE 4 128MB Ti4600http://vatsim.pilotmedia.fi/statusindicato...tor=OD1&a=a.jpg

Robert has said in another post that your real first name is [/b]ok[/i] but this might be an exception for those who have an issue with using their real full names {concerned with identity theft}. I really think that the way they are designing the panel is superior in many ways to other types including so-called photo realistic designs. If you ask me the screenshots so far look incredible and shows what a couple of thousand dollars graphic program can do for you.Best Wishes, Randy J. Smith[h5]San Jose Ca[/h5][h3]" A little learning is a dangerous thing"[/h3]AMD XP 2100 |MUNCHKIN 512 DDR RAM |ECS[/b ][i] K7S5A MB[/i] |GF3 64 MEG |WIN XP PRO |MITSUBISHI DIAMOND PLUS 91 19"

Gents-John hit the nail on the head here. While photographs can be processed succesfully into the sim, we have found that this limits the flexibility of the design rather significantly. For example, one of our designers expressed a desire to make a very subtle change to the viewing angle of one panel- so Marc simply rendered it from the new angle and we were able to test out the new perspective.Because we can move the eyeball perspective to anywhere we choose, it gives us a tremendous amount of flexibility that we would not otherwise have.Of course- none of this matters if your cockpit modeler doesn't know his stuff- and in Marc's case- we are quite proud of his work!Robert S. RandazzoPrecision Manuals Development Group http://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/coolcap.gifwww.precisionmanuals.com

Thanks for your explanations! Now I know, which advantages you have when not using this photorealistic stuff. Thanks again for your work-it will be fantastic to get the long awaited NG!

@ PMDG :regarding the panel lightning : will it be possible to turn just the gauge lights on ( e.g. using at night finals) and to have the full panel lightning at the gate like on those pics below.Thank youhttp://www.airliners.net/open.file/220851/L/http://www.airliners.net/open.file/179778/L/Matthias