Just wondering why the engine seems to spool up so fast ? It seems a little unrealistic to me. The process from where you add the fuel to the moment where the engine stabilises seems to take only a very few seconds. It seems very accelerated in this sim.In other sims eg 747-400 Precision Sim the start process even with Autostart isn't as fast as this. Anyone care to comment???BARGE

The PIC product is not an exact replica of the real aircraft. However, it is, overall, pretty close. I believe I read on a different thread regarding this. The engines do indeed start faster than they would in real life. There are a few 'trade-offs' in the program to make it a little more fun for the average user. Like I said though, overall, the program simulates the aircraft quite closley. I recommend, if you haven't already done so, to read BBALL's review on the PIC program. He is a 757 captain (BTW, 757 cockpit & 767 are almost identical). He gives much insite into the differences between the real plane and the PIC one. I don't have the website handy, but scroll through the forum and look for "BBALL's review is out". It can't be too far down. I am sure someone may also post the link here. :)-=MB=-

The PIC product is not an exact replica of the real aircraft. However, it is, overall, pretty close. I believe I read on a different thread regarding this. The engines do indeed start faster than they would in real life. There are a few 'trade-offs' in the program to make it a little more fun for the average user. Like I said though, overall, the program simulates the aircraft quite closley. I recommend, if you haven't already done so, to read BBALL's review on the PIC program. He is a 757 captain (BTW, 757 cockpit & 767 are almost identical). He gives much insite into the differences between the real plane and the PIC one. I don't have the website handy, but scroll through the forum and look for "BBALL's review is out". It can't be too far down. I am sure someone may also post the link here. :)-=MB=-

DOH!!! It posted twice...I hate when it does that. lol-=MB=-

BARGE, I can only talk in general terms on the start speed. I use to work on ancient Air Force flight simulators (F-4E and F-111Ds). In their programs, Singer-Link (manufacture) took the number the engine and airframe manufacture gave them on how long it took to start an engine. Remember back in the late 60s when these Sims were on the drawing boards, computers filled a room and did not have the computing power of today

Actually, I think the compromises made by the PIC team were because of the limitations of the FS2000 platform the software was orginally designed for and not because were because they wanted "to make it a little more fun for the average user."PS-1, on the other hand, does not run on top of FS2000/02.

Yeah you are right! Although this sim has set the standard for years to come with it's incredible flight model, FMC, I cannot believe that Wilco did not order their tires from the Desser Tire & Rubber Company! I mean come on! I don't want to fly around with those re-treds!!! Best Wishes,Randy J. [email protected]" A little learning is a dangerous thing"

"In other sims eg 747-400 Precision Sim the start process even with Autostart isn't as fast as this. Anyone care to comment???"Does PS1 model different starting times for different engine types (RR, GE and P&W), Barge? If so, have you selected the appropriate engine type for comparison? Also, have you allowed for differences in pneumatic duct pressure, the age of the engine, the modifications carried out on the engine, etc.... Is the effect of tailwinds during engine start taken into account in PS1 or PIC? If so, are the winds set at the same speed/direction?Regardless, having a simulation run faster than in real life may give you the edge (in real life). I've been told that some big sims allow you to set higher simulation speeds, so that pilots handling future emergency situations in real life are less stressed as, in real life, the emergency seems to be happening in slow motion. I can see how this would be of benefit when handling rapid rises in EGT during start. Preventing hot starts could mean the difference between the aircraft flying to its destination or not (several engine changes may mean many days of ground time, depending on available spares).Hope this helps.Cheers.Ian.

It bothers me when people compare FS products to PS-1. People do not realize that these products are extensions of an existing "general purpose" simulator as opposed to PS-1 which is a highly specialized simulator in its own right. There simply are some things that cannot be attained within the confines of FS (short of patching FS itself).J

"It bothers me when people compare FS products to PS-1."It bothers me that some people treat PS1 as "gospel". Whilst it is one of the better sims on the market, it should not be treated as some sort of ultimate reference/standard (especially when it comes to 767's!). PIC outdoes PS1 in some respects... and not just in the "eye candy" department.Consider both sims as training aids as well as introductions to the real (respective) aircraft and you can't go wrong. Leave your real flight and engineering manuals and real life experience to fill in the gaps and sort out any discrepancies/misunderstandings. No two airplanes are alike... and as Laurent recently discovered, no two engines are alike :-lolMy 2c's worth.Cheers.Ian.

I didn't mean to throw a cat amongst the pigeons. I realise that they are many, many external factors which come into the equation. I just mean that the start-up process seems extremely quick as I have witnessed as I'm sure have many others the start sequence on the 767 many times. I think even with all the factors that Ian has mentioned the process would still be significantly longer than what is modelled.Saying all this, I can still live with it. BARGE

The problem is not with PIC... It's an FS limitation/bug/error/mistake (or whatever)... Once the fuel switch is turned to ON, the PIC gauges have nothing to do with the start sequence anymore. They DID on FS2000, and back then the startup of each engine would go even up to 2-3 minutes each... But this was not possible in FS2002 as the Microsoft FS team changed something in the new version and did not allow that kind of control.Now that I think of it, each version after FS98 comes with LESS IMPORTANT features and more USELESS features than the prior!!!For example, we had 255 players as the limit in multiplayer in FS2000, now we have 16!!! And there are many more examples!Happy new yearGeorge DorkofikisAthens, Hellas

Yes the multiplayer has not improved even though they lowered the max # of connections. I don't know why Microsoft cannot get this right. Other on-line games that have flyable aircraft don't have problems like aircraft lagging through the friendly skys. I just started flying on Vatsim and I love it but even with my very fast dsl line, other aircraft are never where they appear to be. 500 feet in front then one second later i'm right on them. If games like "Battlefield 1942" can make it smooth as silk flying with others i'm sure Bill Gates and team can also.Best Wishes,Randy J. [email protected]" A little learning is a dangerous thing"