Airbus have had no coverage in flightsim since day one and only now when we see them appearing yanks (mainly) are complaining left right and centre. That's just a typical American view. Did you know 50% of Americans don't have passports! (or some stupidly low number) I urge you to embrace what's not on your door step. I fly the PIC 767 and I think it's great but I don't like the narrow minded bashing of other manufacturers. (Airbus)"I feel sad" - :-rollBoeings latest, 777/747, are just as automated as Airbus.

ohhh....one moment please. Maybe a 777 is a littlebit like the A3xx series (except the A300/310), but the 747 is definitely not. It

Did you know that Continental planned on replacing their entire Boeing fleet for Scairbuses back in the early 90's? They planned a fleet for A320,A330 and A340 aircraft. BUT, I guess they came to their senses and upgraded the fleet with shiney new B-737-500,700,800,900, 767-200,400 and Triple-7's.The one airbus line that COA ran, the A300 was put out to pasture too. I do miss the A300 though. I remember fondly the way the galley cabinets would fall out and hit you in the head if you pulled them too hard while trying to get at those coffee cups!Mike T.If it ain't Boeing - I ain't going!

Ummmm Matthias:Your facts are WAYYYYYYY off base, so if you are going to point fingers and make insinuations then get em right.1) Dreamfleet cancled the A340 because there were too many AIRBUSES (not Boeings) on the market. *TRUE* How many different Airbuses are you going to buy? Are YOU, along with everyone else, willing to buy an Airbus from each develpoper when they are up for sale? Dreamfleet has gauged that sales would not warrant the release of the A340, because there was a slim chance of making a profit. GOD FORBID that they are in business to make a profit. SHAME ON THEM!Likewise, do you want to know the difference between an A320 cockpit and an A340 cockpit? 2 more throttles. So Dreamfleet should develop an IDENTICAL A320 cockpit with two more throttles when there are 3 developers who only needs to add the trottles and systems (a few days worth of work vs. a year worth of work!). Why not just lobby one of the three Airbus makers to add them?On the other hand, the differences in Boeing cockpits from the 727,737,737-NG,757/767,747,777 are all VASTLY different and therefore give a wide scope of development offerings.An A320 pilot can transition to A319, A320 and with little training, the A330 or A340 because the cockpits are similar (the A300 / A310 being the exception). Airbus was ingenious in doing this because pilot transition ease is great in an airbus fleet thus saving the airline money. This doesn't translate too well in FS2002 when you can recycle one cockpit over 3 aircraft and add two more throttle and handle just about the whole fleet. 2) There are NO high fidelity 727 OR 737-NG's on the market. If you know something about sales then you would know that it is far better to bring something new and Unique to market than to try to compete with the rest.The Boeing fleet, because each cockpit is unique and brings a unique experience and learning curve allows for a wider scope of aircraft.So, to clarify their marketing policy for you.1 - Develop a product that is not saturating the market.2 - Sell it to us because we don't have one.3 - Make a profit.See, easy as 1-2-3. Not to sound harsh, but I think you were being very unfair to DF.Mike T.

Good points.People here don't seem to understand that common-cockpit approach in Airbuses, however attractive it makes them for airlines, is much less appealing to simmers. Because once you can master A320 transition to A340, A330, A319,.. etc is elementary. From the simulation point of view (and considering limits of this simulation in the FS world) all these aircraft are essentially identical.Michael J.

Very good points about DreamFleet. I fully understand them. It's much easier for PSS to just change a few things in the A320 FCDU and EICAS and make the panel for A340. So why spend so much time and money to develop something that might not sell?On the same point of view the PIC team could make the slight changes required, mostly in the FMC and the EICAS (for the different engines) to make the WONDERFULL 767 panel fully 757 compatible!BUT (there is always a but!), maybe Wilco which markets the PIC767 don't allow them to do that even if they want to. They may have programmed the panel, but it's Wilco who has the marketing/copyright of the PIC767 (I assume).I also agree that we lack small regional jets for FS2002, but from what I see here in Avsim library, the situation is improving. But we still lack realistic panels for most a/c types.For the 757 which was the main subject, we have a panel. The PIC panel which is very good and practically identical (apart from the FMC values) to that of the 752. What I miss is a correct 757 model with proper flight characteristics. All I have tried are way out, either way overpowered or way underpowered or having completely wrong sensitivities and/or point of view.As for the rest of the overlooked a/c types, what are we going to do with those if we lack a proper panel? Do you like flying a 737NG or a 732 with the default 734 panel? I sure don't!That's why I appreciate the work of the PIC team, PSS and Dreamfleet (I have them all).George DorkofikisAthens, Hellas

Sadly, I think that the PIC team has made it abundantly clear that the 757 is not going to happen. There are more differences between the 76 and 75 than you might imagine. The pneumatic system is different; I would imagine some system logic would have to be reworked. I don't feel the PIC team would be satisfied with making a few changes to an existing work and repackage, ouila, new product, that's 34.00 please. It's been rumored that the SF340 is in the works. THAT would be something unique in this market. PSS is working on a commuter turboprop, but I, for one, have no doubt that a PIC Saab?(allegedly) would blow anything that PSS makes out of the water. I just hope that they use Gmax so we will be able to use it in FS2004...Tom

If PIC are making a Saab 340 I'd like to know! Because, if they are I don't need to *waste my money on a PSS commuter. I mean I don't want to buy two of the same thing.So please tell us.-Paul

>People here don't seem to understand that common-cockpit >approach in Airbuses, however attractive it makes them for >airlines, is much less appealing to simmers. Because once >you can master A320 transition to A340, A330, A319,.. etc is >elementary.Which means that (in theory at least) we only need ONE dedicated developer of a realistic series of Airbus aircraft (A320 PIC comes to mind - if it is good). The same developer makes the A318/19/20/21/30/40.>From the simulation point of view (and >considering limits of this simulation in the FS world) all >these aircraft are essentially identical. And there's not that much difference when it comes to Boeings either. Once I had mastered the PSS 747 a long long time ago, getting used to the 777, 767 PIC and the DF737 was, as you put it, elementary. Sure, there are a lot more differences than between the Airbus cockpits, but there are more similarities than differences.Martin767 fetishistIt's a lot like life and that's what's appealing

@ Mike T :QUOTE :1) Dreamfleet cancled the A340 because there were too many AIRBUSES (not Boeings) on the market. *TRUE* How many different Airbuses are you going to buy? Are YOU, along with everyone else, willing to buy an Airbus from each develpoper when they are up for sale? Dreamfleet has gauged that sales would not warrant the release of the A340, because there was a slim chance of making a profit. GOD FORBID that they are in business to make a profit. SHAME ON THEM!Okay Mike, was my fault. I don

Funny, nobody is asking for a 'real' or close to 'real' Concorde cockpit with close to real FD ! Maybe because this bird remains on of the tougher (commercial) ones get in the air and back down, it has been left aside by the sim community + that only a couple of airlines have them around.I love flying PIC because it comes as close as you can get in a sim and some of the freeware GA that are excellent, but sincerely I spend most of my time programming in real life, don't have to add another session of programming a FMC/MCDU to have fun ... just ask any real pilot that made the transition to Airbus what his preference was.There will come a time that a pilots job will become obsolete, he will only have to take care that all the light blink as they should, smile to the passengers and be available in case the technical hardware goes beserk ...I wonder if FS2010 will really still be about flying at all !Smalco

What

In 2010 it is rumored that there will be only the following in the cockpit:1 - One pilot2 - One dog (with sharp teeth)The "pilot" will be there to monitor the instrumentsThe dog will be there to make sure he doesn't touch anything.Here's to automation! :-beerchug

Back atcha Matt:>Of course they are different. That could also be the same at Airbus, but they have another strategy like you stated before.Reading your post I have the feeling you think DF canceled the project because there are too many products that would have the same cockpit. Flying an A320 and A340 is something different.Absolutely not. The A320-A340 cockpits are just about the same. They have the same look, feel, smell, and +-90% of the same systems. Flying an A319 and flying an A340 are only different in weight and two more throttles (maybe the placement of the landing light switches may be different too :-lol). They are all FBW systems that require VERY little input from the pilot except to command the computers where to go (and they will only let you command them so much! :-lol). Yes, as you say they COULD also be the same at Airbus...but it isn't.>Then tell me how many high fidelity A340 there are? 2,4,6 ....I tell you------> NONEAnd what

Walter:If you own the PSS A320 and want to know what's wrong. Take off, pull your yoke (or sidestick) all the way back and you will find everything that's wrong with the PSS implementation of the A320.The uniqueness of the A320 is not only the flight deck, but it is the triple redundant FBW computer system that does some AMAZING things. In the PSS rendition, they forgot the "AMAZING!" :-lolEven better, go to Apollo's website and they spell out for you how poorly PSS implemented the A320.Mike T.