Hi folks,I just downloaded the August cycle for PIC from Navdata. It seems that the PIC database is identical to the PMDG database. Would it be hazardous to draw a conclusion from this? Are the PIC developers the same guys who created PMDG? or am I on the wrong track?Michael

Hi Michael,The PMDG 737 uses the PIC767 NavData. So it is the same.However, the two aircraft models were made by two completely different teams.

Yeah, PMDG just decided to standardize on the PIC navdata format (a good idea IMO) - PMDG apparently was involved in the development of the original freeware panel that the PIC Team released though (the flight model)Ryan

Indeed, PMDG is the future of complex jet simulation. 767 PIC was the Bell X-1 of heavy jet simmming - it broke new ground and accomplished what others were convinced could not be done. It pushed the envelope and paved the way for the future.PMDG's 737 simulation is destined to be what a modern F-15 fighter was to the X-1 - it will capitalize on the pioneering accomplishments of 767 PIC and push the envelope much further. 767 PIC has it's place in history but it's just that - history. It's time to move on and embrace a bright new future, one more exciting than ever. :)

Gee Dave, you really love to come in here and stir it up don't you?What a bogus #### troll-troglydyte post. DS CVA3339 / UKD149System: Attlon 900 McW Hamster/Gerbilized Quantum Accessible 55Gig Iodized-Encrusted Four-poster with Mega-brill Farzenhuuven http://vatsim.pilotmedia.fi/statusindicato...tor=OD1&a=a.jpg

(sigh) Oh boy, you never give me a break do you :) I'm not trying to troll anyone or anything. PIC is great, has always been great, and will always be great. Never debated such, so sirree.Wade Chafe, development team member, has essentially acknowledged that the lifespan of PIC has come to an end and it's unlikely there will be any future for this wonderful add-on. As he is the only PIC developer in communication with a public forum, I take him at his word and I respect his insight. I appreciate all of the learning and fun times that 767PIC has afforded me. I will that I got my money's worth out of the program to say the very least. :)Actually, on a more personal note, I think Mr. Chafe has cahonies (sp) of titanium to have engineered a patch to make 767 PIC compatible with FS2002 in the midst of all the post 9-11 hysteria going on at the time. Remember when Wal-Mart pulled Flight Simulator off the shelves? I have nothing but absolute respect for a man that provided such a thing when it would have been much easier to abandon everything and just disassociate oneself from simming altogether. That took guts, five o'clock in the morning guts, and it revealed a commitment to a product and it's customer base that nothing and noone will ever hold a candle to. Needless to say, this guy is A-OK in my book. :)When one considers that among the PIC developers is an active airline pilot whose own company was directly victimized by the terrorist attack, the extension of 767PICs life to present day was a amazing act of personal resolve for all of these guys. Wade has said before and now recently reaffirmed, that the development of PIC is very unlikely to continue further. He has encouraged the support of other add-ons available in the wake of 767PIC. I agree, who am I to argue with the logic of someone who has worked so hard?My own personal observation is that the future of complex jet sims now lies with PMDG. I don't draw this conclusion to spite anyone, far from it. I am excited that the vision of 767PIC continues with a new generation for a new simulator :) Technology is dynamic, always changing, always in motion. As hard as it is to try new things and to be willing to explore new vistas, it's for the best and it exposes us to new ideas, different experiences, chances for even more fidelity. Things just keep getting better all the time and it's one of the joys of computer simulation.

What is it about the NG that makes you think it has surpassed PIC? I see a lot more unimplemented features in the NG than I do in PIC.Believe me, I would like to see an NG built to PIC standards. In my opinion, they aren't there, and even when the bugs are worked out and the feature list filled out, the NG is going to take a lot more PC horsepower than PIC. Even with a VC-less model from the 2D cockpit, I am struggling with poor frame rates on my P3-933. Bummer.Lee Hetherington (KBED)

"What a bogus #### troll-troglydyte post. "You can have your flashing light back. :-)

Yes, there are definitely teething pains, no doubt about it. I just think as FS2004 progresses it's the future as the successor to 767PIC. Who knows, maybe a better one will come out by a different group. That too would be great.I wish P767PIC could go on forever but it just can't without someone to program it.

Of course I agree with you Dave (can or WORMS HERE) hehe. I still have PIC on my puter, how could I ever get rid of it? Lee, trust me, just as I informed Tero there is not a single thing that will be left behind that PIC has and will will see in the 737NG. You mention that it's not ahead of PIC, I BEG to differ. It's just that you cannot just compare such and such without looking at the *bigger* picture. So PIC's FMC has RTE DATA and the 737 does not at the moment. Well the 737 levels off at the EN-GAGED *alt hld* whereas PIC levels off where ever but certainly not at the engaged altitude. Why does PIC have SPD RESTRICTION 250/10000 on the CLB page AFTER passing the restriction? My point is that there are MANY things that PIC does not get 100% OR model at all and yet you judge the 737 with a DIFFERENT measuring rod. Most statements about the 737NG are in fact based upon misguided information of the real aircraft + systems. Stablity first and then Details...[h5]Best Wishes,Randy J. Smith [h4]P M D G 7 3 7 NG[/h4]http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-8/196432/mineimage.jpg [h3] Realism on the horizon [h5]AMD XP 2200 |MUNCHKIN 512 DDR RAM |ECS[/b ][i] K7S5A MB[/i] |GF2 MX 32 MEG and still runs GOOD!|WIN XP PRO |MITSUBISHI DIAMOND PLUS 91 19"[/h5]

"Yes, there are definitely teething pains, no doubt about it."You may call it "teething pains", but, personally, having to wait 6~7 minutes for the sim to boot up in 2D (alone) on a Athlon 1800+ with a 64Mb video card and 512RAM seems to me to be "major dental reconstructive surgery".From an aircraft engineer's point of view, some of the aircraft's systems seem to be very primitive and underdeveloped compared to PIC's (Pneumatics, hydraulics, electrics, etc). Their team doesn't seem to have had any support from 737 aircraft engineers (the faults leap out at even me, and I've only been working on the 737 for a dozen hours or so in a Line Maintenance situation... where you don't get to do very much on these aircraft at all).And how can you market a sim where switch positions are not remembered when you boot up the sim the next day. Every flight has to be started from scratch (you can't reprogramme the FMC in flight). BTW, I've never worked on or flown a Cessna, which seems to be a necessity to be able to set up their aircraft properly. I think these guys should have a serious talk with the PIC team to ask them how it should be done... properly.Teething problems... on an "enfant terrible" perhaps (pardon my French).Jeers.Ian "too placid for his own good" R.P.S. Having said all that, I'm willing to take another look at this sim when the dust has settled (mainly out of need, rather than desire). The developers are listening to constructive criticism..... but there's just so much of it at the moment, I can't see them fixing even a fraction of their (now my) problems in the near future (I say "my" problems... as they are not offering refunds to disgruntled users).

Once you've flown a wide body heavy, with the sound of the big turbofans, roomy cockpit and a simulator that flies like B767 PIC, it's hard to go back to flying a FLUF! I will be keeping FS2002 on my HDD for a long time, unless there's a patch for FS9. I don't care how long it takes to get out a patch or a new product. I just hope they do and I really wish the Team would put out the data to convert the FMC to a B757. Eric said in an old interview it would be really easy.But, until that time comes I'm really happy I have my copy of B767 PIC!!!!

I don't want to read about the bloody 737 here on the PIC forum - if I want to check the product out, I will check it out on THEIR forum - take the random natterings, brags, boasts, hyperbole elsewhere, please.Show some respect to this forum and to the developers and users of the PIC.DS CVA3339 / UKD149System: Attlon 900 McW Hamster/Gerbilized Quantum Accessible 55Gig Iodized-Encrusted Four-poster with Mega-brill Farzenhuuven http://vatsim.pilotmedia.fi/statusindicato...tor=OD1&a=a.jpg

Well I close off my contributions to this thread by saying again that that 767PIC was the crown jewel of all add-ons for flight simulator. I'm not ever going to say that anything will ever really replace it, just that maybe there is some hope with add-ons in the future from other developers. :) I think software developers are like professional athletes, sometimes a team just comes into the game with unbeatable talent. Lord knows fans wish they could keep the team together forever but it just can't always be. Eric, Wade, Laurent and Pedro were the simulator 'dream team'. It may in fact be many years before anyone ever parallels their ability completely, if ever. 767PIC won the Super Bowl several times over. With FS2004 it's the first round draft of another fresh season, new players and coaches starting all over again. I'd rather watch my dream team play forever if I had a choice but the old guard has retired and things move on. :)

Hi,I am sorry if my original post opened the way to a heated discussion about PMDG versus PIC. This was surely not the intend of my post. I was only wondering if there was a logic in the similarities of the navaids of both aircraft and if one could see a sign that the PIC programers may still be in business but may be bound to some non disclosure agreements and currently working with another team on another product. This was my only thought. Again sorry if it has been mis-interpretated.Michael