I feel sad...

[Guest]

Well, I mainly referred my "what

[hopskip 253]

well there arn't gonna be any widebody long range airbusses for sale for a long time now are there? Ever tried flying from WSSS to YMML direct in an A320? no, I didn't think so... I guess the 767 is there, but really, to say that the A340 and A320 are basicaly the same is just stupid... just like saying the 737 and 777 are the same thing. Heck the A340 has 4 engines! a shame to loose that aircraft. So far I'm not happy with any of the widebodys available except for the PIC767. I was looking forward to having an airbus widebody, but looks like that's not going to come to fruition. a pity, because I do a lot of sim flying in the Asia area, and the A340 is quite common around there. I still don't have the PSS747-400 and have found from mucking around with it at a friends that I wasn't really impressed with it enough to buy... I guess I'll just stick to the 767 and 737 I have for the timebeing...

[Guest]

Thank you for pointing out the range differences between the A320 and the A340 are different, I am now enlightened and drawn from my stupidity thanks to you. :-lolWe are talking PANELS. PANELS don't have a range and PANELS are the major deciding factor in what is released or not. There are tons of freeware Airbuses and Boeings all over the place, but there are NOT tons of high quality panels.Building an aircraft is relatively easy compared to coding a high quality panel and THAT sir was the delimiting factor that we were discussing.... I guess you missed that?

[michal 44]

I wonder sometimes .. are some people so dumb or they just pretend to be one to get the argument going :-lolMichael J.

[Guest Matthias1975]

Okay, Mike I don

[Guest]

Hallo Mike I cant agree with you!First: Apollo ist in my opinion vaporware. Last year they have announced an airbus for summer 2001 and ... nothingAt the end of last may they have announced an airbus for June 2002 and ... nothing.Nobody has seen any screenshot, no shop has heard about an new Apollo software. I'm reading the german magazin "fligtxpress" . They have announced the Apollo Airbus too, but Apollo was unable to send them a preview version and now you can read in there forum that there is ... nothing (http://www.wcm.at/vb2/showthread.php?threadid=65954 )DF has canceled there A340-project because of the time to complete it. Lou has written something about the timeframe - more then a year - and next Christmas you can find FS2004 in the shops.He has written about several commercial Airbus project, but I have heard only from the PSS and the PIC A320, but no long range A340/A330 - only Apollo vaporware "Fly by wire"If there is room for several GA-planes (DF Archer, DF Cardinal, DF C310, flight1 C421, fsd Commander, fsd Cheyenne, fsd Seneca V, fsd Navajo, fsd Porter 2002 ...) and two B727, a B737-400, one B777 , one B747 and of course the B767 PIC why not for one A330 or A340?The only commercial reason I can understand is the time DF needs to programm an Airbus with its special flight characteristics and FS04 coming out soon after the DF Airbus!You are talking about panels: I can't find a panel for a long range Airbus even with a PSS panel. There Airbus is not perfect but at the moment the first and only one that shows some parts of fly by wire. Panels are limited in range because of the fuel and weights of the aircraft you can enter in the FMS / MCDU! Is there a working PSS / Posky A330 merge? No because of the limitations of weight and fuel in the panel!Carsten, waiting for the A320 PIC

[Guest]

Hello George! I share the same feelings as you do! Sad to see most of the development companies going all plastics. One plane that I'm particularly disappointed in for FS is the B747-400. PSS sure was great while it lasted, but it has become obsolete over time, and flying PiC doesn't make it any better! (hehe) It would sure be nice to see a new B747-400 out there some day..Just my two cents..http://www.mydestiny.net/~michael8/744banner.gif

[Guest GeorgeDorkofikis]

Ok...I think we missed the point here... Maybe I was not very clear on my post. Mike T and Mike B only got the right point.I was talking about panels AND FLIGHT MODELS ! :-)On one side we have PIC for the 763, DF34 for the 734, PSS 320 for the A32x series and PSS744 for the 744.Now, let me say my own remarks on those panels/planes and explain what I mean by the "I feel sad" post.PSS320Even if the FBW systems are not 100% accurate in the PSS bus, this does not mean that the flight model is scrap. On the contrary, the flight model is quite accurate during normal operations. The FCDU is represented very well and it's completely functional. After their last patch, the plane flies very good. I would like to try and test how the A-Floor works (it's a simulator after all!), but for my normal flights, the PSS Airbus is very good.PSS744It shows its age. The flight dynamics are very nice and feel real. The FMC is a bit outdated since you have to enter each and every waypoint manually as airways are not accepted. You can also couple the panel with the very nice POSKY Jumbos with no problems.DF734Opinions are confusing here. Flight dynamics feel real, but there are severe problems with the Autoflight with the aircraft. The autopilot will not catch and follow the GS, VNAV may not operate as appropriate. And this is NOT an MS fault! Also, the FMC is VERY slow and has great impact on the frames since it's a different application. Overall the cockpit of the 734 is very well represented and with the correct procedures. Hand flying or manually navigating is the best way to fly this plane.PIC763Still the best cockpit simulation around! The FMC and autoflight systems work perfect, the flight model is very accurate, the procedures realistic and the impact to the FS performance minimal! The only objection that I have is the original visual model which was made as scenery and heavily impacts the performance, but with the nice merging with the POSKY visual model, PIC ROCKS!On the freeware side, there are the very good panels for the 732, 722, Falcon 50 (there are sure more, I haven't tried them all, after flying with PIC everything else seems too small ;-) ).What do we actually need? More realistic panels and more realistic flight dynamics.You can find almost every a/c you want in the libraries, but is there a panel for that a/c to fly with? Are the flight dynamics correct (as far as FS limits them) ? Not really... Most fly either like an F16 or like the default crapy 737. Sorry guys, no offence, but that's the way it is.So, I feel sad because we may have yet another fully detailed super dooper panel and aircraft for an aircraft type already covered!But still NONE for the rest... And I don't like flying a very beautyfull Tristar or 757 with the default 777 or 734 panel... :-(Someone mentioned the Concorde... From what I have read in the PSS forum, PSS is planning to release a Concorde. I Hope that they will get it right, cause the Concorde is a bit hard plane to simulate.Sorry for the long post... It just gets longer!...Fly safe.George DorkofikisAthens, Hellas

[Guest]

I think I can agree to this message 100% :-)The PIC 767 is by far the best but the flight model of the PSS 747-400 is certainly very good, too (this was confirmed by Captain Mel Ott). The PSS A-320 is OK if you do not expect a perfectly realistic Airbus (I hope the Apollo - Airbus will be really good but who knows if it will ever be released :-( ).The DF - 737 - quality is a little ambiguous. I think its OK now (well, autoland and ATT HOLD does not function very good and the FMC still does not work 100% in some situations - so there is always room for some unpleasant surprise) but the first CD-release was simply dreadful. As far as I can judge it, the airfile is quite good and also the graphics of the cockpit are better than those of the PSS - panel.As you say there are lots of beautiful aircrafts available as freeware. What we really need are realistic panels/airfiles which now seem to be so much advanced in some cases (like PIC etc) that it cannot be done anymore by freeware-groups...so I hope there will be good payware-products available in the future (and I really mean better than the DF -737 FS2000-CD-version)!Walter

[Guest]

This is the most pointless thread I think I've read. Here's my take. I fly frequently. I like seeing airbuses at the gate because they are more comfortable. Plane I hate seeing at the gate more than any: Boeing 757. Friggin' flying school bus in coach on any airline except AA and UAL (in the premiere section).Plane I want to see at the gate: B777. Comfortable and nice big windows. I'm done.

[Guest]

The PSS 744 sure was the best during it's time. Remember - it pioneered the functional FMC for Flight Simulator. Any other panel for FS was way out of it's league. But then came PiC and DF. In the past year, PSS has gone from the top to the bottom of the list when it comes to panel realism and functionality. I'm sure Capt. Mel Ott was aware of other panel quality around during November 1999, so it's no wonder he said it was the best. It WAS the best during it's time.I like realism in FS. It's like an addiction. Once you get more of the realistic stuff, you can't getting enough of it. Up until a month ago, I didn't really like the B767. To me it was just another plane, but after PiC, it's all I've simmed in the past month! (PiC rocks!) For me, the issue of being payware of freeware really isn't an issue. I'd be willing to shell out so much for a panel that would be really worth it. hehe.. where am I going? .. hmmm.. new 744 panel? :Dcheers!http://www.mydestiny.net/~michael8/genavbanner.gif

[Gavin 99]

GeorgeCheer up! Bill Grabowski is working on an MD-11 panel. And as it's Bill Grabowski, it'll certainly be a work of art.If you don't already know, go to www.fsnordic.net and check out the ERJ-145 panel forum for screenies.Gavin

[Guest GeorgeDorkofikis]

Why do you say that?We discuss, we meet eachother, have a good time... It's like a party ! :-)And we learn a lot of new interesting things too. Some may be off topic, but that doesn't make them not interesting.One thing I will agree with you is comfort. Most comfortable are the Airbuses and 777s, 747s... No doubt about that...But we are talking FS here, not real a/c passenger comfort. And believe me, the 757 is VERY comfortable there in front... Both real and virtual ;-)Oh, and I Got my most beautyfull photo of the Alps through that XXXL left side cockpit window of a 757! :-)Cheers,George DorkofikisAthens, Hellas

[Guest]

>I'm sure Capt. Mel Ott was aware of other panel quality >around during November 1999, so it's no wonder he said it >was the best. It WAS the best during it's time. Well, Capt. Ott was speaking of Johan Dees

[Guest]

I meant the best 747-400 airfile, of course :-)No comparison to the PIC -767 - airfile intended (or even possible) of course...W.