I've never purchased a wilco product, but am looking forward to airpot 2002. I have used PSS products, and even though very nice funtionally and visually, not smooth at all. In fact, only flown PSS 747 once since fs2k2. I've downloaded some scenery done in GMAX, very good detail, very good performance. Most recently CYHZ and RJAA. I'm impressed.1 ghz PIII, 64 mb GF2, 386 ram.

Tom, As you mention it. It is possible to treble frame rate by being economic in design, I D/L your A320 and took it off for the following reasons, Bad installation routine.....(no excuse with all the free install programs available)Bad frame rate....every thing on the model is textured in it's own file..WHY ? It expands to 38 mb, again WHY ? The MS 737 covers it's self in 1-2 textures, it works fine as a model, what makes you justify 38 mb ? Please tell me, I love to look at your rendition but that is as far as it gets I'm afraid.RegardsGeorge

Airport 2000 version 2 ran OK in with my current system which is a 1.2G Athlon (100busDDR) with 133Mhz 512 SDRAM, and a GeForce256DDR. I don't remember the actual framerates I was getting but I remember it being not too bad. But then, FS2002 was released, and I never went back to using the Wilco product again.

hi george,yes thats right. i designed the a320 as complex as i could. there are so much texture files just because the maximum resolution in fs2002 is 1024x1024 pixels and i wanted to have real high-quality textures. thats why the package became so big. why should i create a "framerate friendly" a320 with so many excellent versions already released. take a look on IADG

>>Pretty ridiculous how much performance that demands, IMOWell, people complain when they buy stuff that sets the recommended specs to low, now Wilco is actually being HONEST about what the software needs, and we still complain? I don't get it.At least they're being up front about the specs.