PMDG 747 and FSX in PC Pilot issue 44

[Guest dave67]

http://www.oncourse-software.co.uk/forum_images/fdc_beta.jpg]http://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannersupporter.jpg]"Always sit at the rear of an aircraft,because they always find the Black Boxes"Hi all,Has anybody read page 57 of PC pilot looks like Aerosoft will have it in stock at the start of the new year,retailing at

[Tabs 2,790]

We have not given release dates to Aerosoft or anyone else for that matter. I do not know where they get this supposed info they're printing. Ignore it.

[G7USL 117]

The 747 is already on sale at http://www.play.com/Search.aspx?searchtype...earch&pa=searchDid you mean the MD-11? :-)

[Guest kdundon]

If you read the add it says it is for FS2004. Just a minor point.

[Guest dave67]

http://www.oncourse-software.co.uk/forum_images/fdc_beta.jpg]http://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannersupporter.jpg]"Always sit at the rear of an aircraft,because they always find the Black Boxes"KenIf you look very closely it says on the box "Flight Simulator X" NOT FS2004,if it said FS2004 i wouldn't have posted it.We are looking at page 57 aren't we.Regards Dave

[Guest AJ]

This misinformation campaign from Aerosoft is really becoming annoying. They have the same add in COmputer Pilot as well, and have been running it for at least 2-3 months now. PMDG should really give those folks a call and ask them ##### is going on. Or perhaps they need to take legal action. It is giving a lot of people the wrong impression.Andrew

[G7USL 117]

I just read the ad, on Page 57 and think that Aerosoft have declared this great new addon for the New YEar as opposed to being for FSX.I agree though, it is misleading for those 'not in the know'.

[Guest kdundon]

>http://www.oncourse-software.co.uk/forum_images/fdc_beta.jpg]>>http://www.jdtllc.com/images/rcv4bannersupporter.jpg]>>>>"Always sit at the rear of an aircraft,because they always>find the Black Boxes">>Ken>>If you look very closely it says on the box "Flight Simulator>X" NOT FS2004,if it said FS2004 i wouldn't have posted it.>We are looking at page 57 aren't we.>>Regards DaveNo actually I used the link you put in your note but not to worry I still read quite well and will look closer next time so I don't offend anyone.