Let me get this straight - although it "appears perfect in every other respect" (and I am not sure you are aware of the quality of the Model and FMC) because the stand-by instruments (!) are on a pop-screen you are considering not buying the product. This even though no other add-on has close the level of realism that you are striving so hard to achieve. Even DF's 737 has eye-candy on the overhead (which drives me nuts!). Tom!! Stand-buy instruments??!!??Sheeezzz.Just my $0.02 (Update: on the other hand Tom I feel you are new to the sim world and that you don't appreciate the more sophisticated aspects of sim models/panels. Learn the basics, then I highly recommend you buy PIC and see what realism is truly about.Regards,WS

Yeah go buy 767PIC! when I first got my copy I didn't know if it was worth it (I didn't even know why I bought it) I got worried and got a little upset :-roll (still at store with the bag and software in my hand) Did they just rip me off with $35 dollar 767 software? Well guess what!! this software ripped my head off! (just kidding!) :-hang Where can you find an addon aircraft that can simulate inflight (well also including ground emergencies such as Tire Blowout) emergencies realistically? And im also quoting someone said above "Pressing a button can crash a whole system down" let me give you an example:If you accidentally hit or pull a engine fire lever the coresponding engine would shut down. (yes engine fire levers work!) It would cause the AT to disconnect and so as the autopilot. You would loose hydraulic preasure in the corresponding system. (Left or Right depending on the engine) This will trigger the backup pumps to work (powered by pneumatics or electricity). You would loose a generator (either left or right) would couse the bus tie to disconnect to supply power to the side of the failure. Bleed air would loose a pump too so isolation valves would open to supply the failed system with air. You would have to do cross feed fuel to keep everything balanced.Don't worry all is not over yet you can still try to reiginite the engine you would have to decend thought to a thicker atmosphre say 19000 feet (I think if I still remember) to reiginite the engine you would have to close the packs to provide more preasure to the engine (called X-Bleed I think) switch the fire handles back to norm turn off fuel valve on failed engine and switch engine ignition to flt mode hear the engines spool up? as soon as N2 reaches 18 and up open fuel valve and disengage all back up stuff whoo!... sorry I can't say anything anymore(for more buy 767PIC). It will take a page and a half more to finish this checklist.After you've seen all this happen you would wish you had a co-pilot with you. If you would like to enjoy normal flights you can if you want.More to be said...Sorry got a little carried away. :-bigangelPluto1168(kelvin)

These type of posts and threads are usually started by folks like this "TGM" mamber since June who has ONE post...and he's never answered the thread! Why do we always swallow troll bait??

Cuz it's fun! It's fun! :D/me gets driven away by the men in white

I wanted to reply to this post earlier but was having some firewall issues which I have now resolved. I agree, the panel is not very good, here is a picture of the sim and a picture of the real deal. It is VERY obvious that the one on the left is real and the one on the right is the sim, no, wait, it's the right is real and left is sim, no, no, I forgot they are bot real or maybe they are both the sim?? I am so confused... You make the call.... Mike B. 3d39d2ad22d5a5aa.jpg

It's obvious the one on the left is the real one. The one on the right looks like such a fake. Look at those colors...Pedro

ROFLMYAO.. Good one Pedro... Yea, this is a terrible simulation alright.... Mike B.

Well Pedro what can I say?I put my own comments about the panel on the forum to generate a discussion.I thought this would envoke a discussion about the panel and not an attack on me personally.If you wish to discuss the panels good or bad points thats fine. I welcome it. Please keep your comments about what I do or don't know about flt-sim products to your self.again regards: Tom

Tom,The reason for the "adjustment" of the gauges is that if they were all put into the proper positions, where they could all be seen on the main screen, they would be too small for MOST people to read on their monitors.Another option would have been to leave them in their proper positions, and keep them a readable size, but this would have required multiple windows just to view the main panel.We willonly NEED the stand-by gauges if we have a failure of the primary displays, so there is not much need for to be looking at them all the time - right?I think that everyone here will agree that the PIC Team picked the best compromise.

Oh #####! One of them is backward! :-lol

>do however, is wait for the 767PIC for Fly! to be released, >then you can use arrow keys to pan all over the cockpit. >However, the downside to that is in real life, you don't use >arrow keys to look around with, In FLY! you can actually pan (scroll) around main panel not using any arrow keys - just the mouse. I actually do like FLY's scrolling panels. And if you want to change views rapidly - you can program your own views.Michael J.

Tom,This entire forum is a discussion on the PIC 767 panel (duh!!!!!!), I belive the premise that you started with this thread, is that the panel has some gauges left out and that the gauges don't look like the real thing.The discussion that you see listed here is a rebuke of that premise and the rational that was put into the design of the panel, by experts.I am sure that most folks on this forum take issue with the assumption that the panel is not as real as its gets.Again, may I suggest to you that you purchase the panel and then comment on your experience like the rest of us have done.Bob JohnsonDenver, CO and PIC 767 Beta Tester

Tom, I think that if you read all these replies, you'll get a pretty good idea of what people think !! They are all correct when it comesto PIC. It's the best there is...so go out and get yourself a copy and when you've "flown" her for a good 20 hours come back and tell uswhat you think then. I remain convinced that it won't take you long tobecome addicted...Happy Landings. Rhys (LSZH)

Just a thought. Have any of you seen the 757 cockpit produced by World Air Sim? I got it with an add-on of London Heathrow Live.One advantage over pic was the fact that there was no need for pop-ups and windows. You just point down on the hat switch and you see the FMC on your lower right where you'd expect to see it. If you want pre-engine start, point up on hat and you have the upper console. Same for left and right. There really is no need for pop up windows just because of screen size. And yes the FMC works on this aircraft as well. I agree PIC is far superior in terms of model and complexity of instrumentation but it really is showing its age in terms of layout. Most users will have a hat switch which is ideal for navigating a 360 degree cockpit. I am a PIC fan so please don't be too upset by this comment. Nothing is perfect in life and PIC has room for improvement that the next installment on the A320 will surely show.John

WS,I am wondering what makes you think I am new to the simming world?I have been with flt-sim since it was ver 5 and in that time I have tried and had about every addon produced (as most people have), both freeware and payware (I am currently flying both Pss models 747 & 777 and Dreamfleets 737).I have worked for the Royal New Zealand Airforce as an avionics technician, so I know a little about cockpits and their instruments.I was not at any stage saying that the pic767 was not as good as it gets in regards to its realism regarding its operation or its systems, I have no doubt it as real as it gets in these departments.I mearly made a personal comment about how I perceived the look of the main 2D panel, nothing more, nothing less.regards: Tom