Hi there am fairly new to this flight sim thing having just purchasaed fs2002 a few wweeks ago. I have discovered however to my great disappointment that pretty much all of the default planes suck in terms of graphics and more importantly flight dynamics-- they are just too easy to fly. with that in mind i would appreciate all your input as to which 3rd party sim is the best to buy of the above two choices which from all my research seems to hav4e gotten the most attention? I want the most realistic in terms of flight modelling, graphics, etc,etc. thanks to all replies, gooper

Just go for PIC 767 man!!!!!! The best add-on since then...I think U will just love it...Believe me!!!PSS 747 is less more realistic...but good enoughEazy2k.

PIC all the way...

Hello "Gooper" is it? Well, I agree with everyone else that the PIC767 is the way to go as far as realism goes. However, I also own the PSS 747 and 777 series. Although not as realistic in function as the PIC package, PSS produced beautiful exterior models and beautiful panels. And not all that expensive when you consider what you get for the $$$$$. Of course, I don't fly the PSS aircraft all that much now, you could use them as a stepping stone in working up to the PIC package. I've had my face stuck in the PIC manuals for some time now learning all of the systems and have yet to really log a lot of time flying the 767. I want to really know the systems before getting into the air with this one, BEFORE getting into the failures and such.....Best of luck to ya....which ever you choose....Tony P.

Greetings,I am a new PIC believer! It is the most realistic panel and FMC that I have ever seen in a SIM. I would agree that the PSS series is right up there in the top group but PIC is number one for this simmer!Fly Happy, Fly Safe!Ted "Shureflight" ShureAAL333 - Assistant Hub ManagerAmerican Virtual Airlineswww.flyava.orghttp://ftp.appcenter.net/Shureflight/Pics/AmericanFlagAA.jpgGod Bless America!Proverbs 3:5,6AMD Athalon 1200Asus A7A266400 Watt Power Supply (3 case fans)512 Megs Ram DDR/266 Maxtor DiamondMax 60gigGF3 Ti500 64 Sound Blaster LIVE! PlatinumWindows XP Pro, DirectX 8.1CH Flight Sim Yoke USB CH Pro Pedals USB

Hi Goop!I own and fly both products........but in my humble opinion PIC767 edges out PSS747-400 on many differing levels.From graphics, Panel display, Panel function, views, the list goes on.If it's more realism you prefer, PIC767 is the choice. If it's just bummin' around having fun flying, PIC767 is the choice.There are also good points on PSS747-400, but overall PIC767 is the far superior product. (In my humble opinion)Best Wishes,767aka: Steve

HiIn my opinion PIC767 is worth every penny I spent on it. Also Dreamfleet 737-400 if your system's powerfull enough. I would also like to recommend Bill Grabowski's outstanding ERJ-145 FREEWARE panel (the download comes with some very nice aircraft too). to find this, go to www.fsnordic.net, then the file library, aircraft (or maybe panels??). One word of advice about the ERJ package. If you install it, and the FS2K2 update (VITAL!!), EXACTLY as the 'read me' file tells you, it'll work a treat. If you want to play around, good luck!! The ERJ panel support forum is a very friendly, helpfull place. any probs and we'll be happy to help you out. fsnordic also has a very nice Tu-134 panel/aircraft package, if you'd like to try out some Russian aircraft.Welcome to flight sim! Do as most of us do, buy/download the quality stuff and you'll never use the default aircraft again. Unless you want to, of course!Best regards!Gavin

Hi Gooper,I'd definitely go with the PIC767 package all the way. Make sure you get the FS2002 update and also the POSKY 76 series models. We all started from scratch on this panel so I'm sure we'd all be happy to help you out when you have any questions. This forum is one of the friendliest and most knowledgable resources available in my opinion. The models that came with PIC767 are frame rate hogs and will slow any PC down to a crawl. The POSKY 76 models are excellent and very frame rate friendly. We are lucky enough to have an excellent program available to us by Lee Hetherington to incorporate these two addons.All the best,Dan PergauOttawa, Canada

PIC dude...its the best all around IMO.I also love DF737..but thats not your subjuct.when using our planes..I suggest using Lee's merge program for th eFDE.http://www.avsim.com/posky/images/banners/gary_ban.gif

If you have the money and the time, I would start with buying the PSS744 and learining that one first. Then, when you think you have it all under control, specifically the FMC and correct use of the autopilot systems, then go get the 767. Without the experience I had on the PSS744, the PIC767 would have taken a long time to learn.My 2p.Rob.

The PIC767 is definitely far more superior and complex than the PSS744, PSS777 and PSSA3XX. Before purchasing the product may I suggest downloading and printing the manuals as well as run through them to get a basic idea of the 767 systems.>If you have the money and the time, I would start with >buying the PSS744 and learning that one first. Then, when >you think you have it all under control, specifically the >FMC and correct use of the autopilot systems, then go get >the 767. That will have it's good points and it's bad. The PSS744 has a limited amount of fully functioning systems. Those that do function not always function correctly and this may lead to the new user developing bad habits.Best Regards,

>If you have the money and the time, I would start with >buying the PSS744 and learining that one first. Then, when >you think you have it all under control, specifically the >FMC and correct use of the autopilot systems, then go get >the 767. I disagree with this. There are way too many systems and procedures that are modeled inaccurately on the PSS bird. You'll just have to unlearn those bad habits to transition to the (much more) realistic PIC 767.PIC 767 all the way; if you're looking for realism, you won't be dissapointed.Jon (KSEA)

hi gavin and thanks for the tip on the ERJ - had a chance to fly the jump seat on an Air canada RJ50 into Chicago O'hare (or O'Scare as some pilots refer to it as!!) and wow! what a treat. i was extremely impressed by the coordination between the two,pilots and man- u want to talk about lots of ATC chatter!! i don't know how they do it - my respect for pilots grew tremendously following that experience . unfortunately following sept 11 no more trips to cockpits anymore so i will have to pursue my next dream- flying a 747 full motion sim. cheers, johnP.S. can u use the POSKY repaints with the PIC 767?

JS and Ryno,Maybe I should have explained further why I suggested PSS744 as a lead in/precursor to the PIC767....Yes, there will be some bad -PSS- habbits to un-learn for the PIC767... but...when transitioning from MS default autopilot TO a Boeing FMC and autopilot systems, the PSS744 can be a useful learning tool. The PSS744 FMC, as one example, has less overall functionality, which may be good for people learning the -basics- of FLCH/VNAV/LNAV, pre-flight set up (weights/v-speeds/cost index...), etc. Point is, the PIC767 can be overwhelming for the MS-default A/P to 'real' FMC-A/P leap...and it is certainly a big leap. Throw in the hydraulic/pneumatics/electrical systems, etc, which are also not properly modelled in the PSS744, and you get a good aircraft to learn basics without worrying about the multitude of other features modelled in the PIC767.The PSS744 serves to help steepen the learning curve - a stepping stone - at least in my experience it did. If I had gone straight from my Cessna at Meigs to the PIC767, it would have been too much, too quickly.The additional fucntionality, opportunity to learn, and quality the PIC767 offers was, for me, much more greatly appreciated than if I had not experienced the PSS744 FIRST. Yes, the PIC767 rules for accuracy and value, it's all I really fly. There is nothing -wrong- with going straight to the PIC767 from default a/c, but I believe you can learn quicker on an aircraft less complex...the PSS744 for example....and have a much greater appreciation for the marvel that the PIC767 is.Just my 2cents worth.Happy landings all.

Yes definitely you can. I have a few liveries for both 762 and 763 in my hangar (Air Canada, Canadian, etc...)You flew on an Air Canada RJ50 to Chicago?! I'd like to hear more about that as Air Canada does not have RJ50s. Perhaps you mean CRJ100 or CRJ200?I too miss jump-seating.. I've been up front in a Dash 8, CRJ and 3 times up in the 762 flightdeck... amazing experiences. Puts the Katana to shame ;-)