Yes, I also noticed that. There is quite a significant difference in alignment so it would be very nice if this was done :DAll the Best,Robin Bilgilhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/800driver.jpg

I know I'm gonna get an earful for this, but....I really dislike the panel perspective. I was really hoping you guys wouldn't do the same thing as with the NG, with the PFD shoved down into the corner. Oh well...

Kavan-I love these types of comments: "TO anyone who was familiar with the airplane."The assumption is that we aren't familiar- have no documentation- don't have a dozen or more technical advisors, etc....If you take a good hard look at your screen layout- you'll find that it is a relatively restricted space. In order to lay the cockpit out accurately in that space- we'd have to make the displays so small that you cannot read them- and it would give you even poorer perspective misalignment than the "normal" FS setup.Let's be completely clear on something: If we set the cockpit panel up so that the view perspective was realistic- we'd have almost no functionality visible on the single screen. It would require the use of approximately 8 popups in order to fly the airplane.While, as a professional airline pilot- that doesn't bother me- it is clear from the forums that most customers would not appreciate this dose of realism.So- we have to make concessions...and not everyone can have everything they want. ;-)This is why we put a significant amount of time into the VC development. If you like realism- and have the horse-power- then the VC will be where you should fly the airplane from. (Only if you are familiar with it tho- *cough*)

Sorry for voicing an opinion...It won't happen again.

Ah Brian, now lets not overcorrect to maintain the centerline.... It only wears down the nose tires. ;-)There is no problem with your opinion- we happen to share the same dislike in this instance. The nature of your complaint seemed to indicate that you lacked understanding of the hows/whys of layout in MSFS 2D panel design- so it falls on me to point out that we have limited resouces to work with- and as such we can't have what you and I want without upsetting a larger portion of the population....

Hi guys at PMDGI was at the birmingham show yesterday the 747 demo was great but there wasnt enough time to answer all our questions understandably. i know it has been mentioned in Mark Harringtons post that what we are seeing in the panel shots are not the finalized product so the may be some inaccuracies so you may be aware of this one and if so i appologise in advance but there is a glaring mistake in the panel layout which would be instantly obvious to anybody who is familiar with the real thing ....the positioning of the upper eicas should be noticably lower than the PFD and ND about a cm or so and is very characteristic of the 747-400 all versions CRT and LCD display only the 777 has all the displays on perfect alignment. sorry to be picky but am just trying to help u get it right before its too late for what otherwise looks to be great workKavan

I don't know sir, I'd rather not get into it too deep, for risk of offending anyone.It's my opinion that you have the main view zoomed in too far, as if your face would be just a foot from the panel itself.This is from 2K2, obviously. It's a modification for PIC, almost a DreamFleet 737 perspective. At 800x600 it may be a bit illegible, but it is beautiful in the sim.http://forums.avsim.net/user_files/99110.jpg

>I don't know sir, I'd rather not get into it too deep, for>risk of offending anyone.>>It's my opinion that you have the main view zoomed in too far,>as if your face would be just a foot from the panel itself.Brian,I don't think you are offending anyone. Definitely not me.But let me offer you a different perspective.I actually like the way PMDG laid out their main 2D panel. It is very much oriented to IFR flight. All main displays take proportionally large amount of real estate - like I said perfect for shooting those ILS approaches without squinting your eyes.And I really don't see this as being zoomed-in too much. Ever used the landing panel on the 767-PIC? Did you feel it was too zooomed in? Well, make sure you maintain correct distance between your eyes and the monitor and you can make the viewing angle as perfect as possible. As a matter of fact if you really start measuring all the angles and compare with the real world a landing-panel like perspective is much more realistic than what you are showing above. I personally rather take perspective which is slightly compromised than tiny displays which are hard to read. But I could also fly with many pop-ups if this was the way PMDG took this product ;-)Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

Hey, it's all a matter of opinion, I understand that.Never tried to say my way is "right", if "right" even exists.I also understand that there are tons of compromises to be made. I'm no pilot, never will be. I will say, that in the bajillion times I've visited the 757 flight deck, if I sit, in the Captain's seat, all the way back as if I were strapped in, the above picture is very close to what I see. Gauge placement, etc., aside, looking straight out over the glareshield, I can see alot more than just the center of the panel, and the above config does a fairly good job trying to mimic that in 2D, IMHO.But, that still doesn't make me right, again, just my opinion.The 744 previews feel very claustraphobic to me, very much a "tunnel vision" perspective IMHO. THAT's what turns me off I guess....the feeling that the view isn't wide enough to see what I should be seeing. I've only visited the 744 flightdeck twice, so I'm surely no expert, but it doesn't look like that. I don't mean colors or fonts or whatever; I mean the view from the Captain's seat, even looking dead forward, isn't that narrow.PMDG will do what works for them, and I'm sure they will have great success with the product. I guess this is just one of thos cases where I'd have to say "It's just not for me.", which is OK too.

Brian,767's PFD/ND having top/down design really makes panel design diferent than in 747 with its side-by-side layout. Different issues when you try to fit them on a monitor screen.But I agree with you, if it was up to me I would rather have correct left-seat perspective, large displays and however many popup subpanels to cover the rest.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

>The 744 previews feel very claustraphobic to me, very much a>"tunnel vision" perspective IMHO. Let me expand on this subject.True, human eye-sight provides about 45 deg viewing angle and your 767PIC's panel roughly agrees with this. But ... in reality most of this 45 deg viewing cone is a peripheral vision - in other words you really can't see detail unless you turn your head. For example if you were sitting in a real 767 cockpit and looking straight at your PFD/ND stack you would have to turn your head slightly to the right to process information on the central EICAS. So in fact human vision is "tunneled". The panel perspective offered above in the 767PIC really encompasses large portion of what would fall under your peripheral vision. You may think it is correct but I personally think it is not realistic based on how human vision works.Michael J.WinXP-Home SP2,AMD64 3500+,Abit AV8,Radeon X800Pro,36GB Raptor,1GB PC3200,Audigy 2

Brian,As Randy said, if you want to experience the true realism and perspective then the virtual cockpit is your only option.The 2D cockpits are always going to be a compromise, which ever way you look at it. :)Armen at EGLLwww.veryquiet.com

Brian, PIC is the last **perspective** you should be showing in regards to realistic panel layout. Even your *mod* does not come close as things are way out of wack. Limitations are a fact of flight simulator, I certainly could not care about how close the displays are, it's what on the displays, how the aircraft represents it's systems. Eye candy with no substance can be found on many add-ons. By the way, what did you think of PS1? Best Wishes,[h4]Randy J. Smith[/h4]http://www.rawbw.com/~bdoolin/shinault/southparkcartmad.gif[h3]PMDG 747![/h3]Caution! Not a real pilot, but do play one on TV ;-)ASUS KV8 DLX | AMD 3200 64 | 1 GIG PC 3200 DDR | GIGABYTE 5700 ULTRA | ViewSonic VP192b 19" |

Randy, Don't go there,there has been to many flaming threads your way lately and you are the one who said not to comment on other products. JeffG

>Let me expand on this subject.I agree, again, I know it's not perfect, but, go back and look at the PIC (lol) I posted, and imagine...You can actually rely a bit on peripheral vision here....I can keep my eyes up and out and still catch an EICAS message, a quick glance to check flaps in motion, etc., it's all there, while AT THE SAME TIME, keeping a widened perspective over the glareshield.OK, time out, please don't read this as argumentative....it may read that way, but it's not intended as such. This is actually a pretty interesting discussion. OK, time in.You raise a good point IRT peripheral vision, and maybe that's key. We can't simulate that on a flat monitor. What I feel, is that the panel I reference includes a good portion of what would be in your FORWARD periphery, (maybe even a bit too much, that I can see) while the PMDG pics do not include any of that. The PMDG views seem to reinforce the fact that you're looking at a flat monitor, while I think the modded PIC panel does it's best to get around that, adding a sense of depth. Does that make sense ?